not avovvedly exercised that cuivis licet supplicare protestari yet the late Parliament concluded contrary to the lavv of nature and nations That petitions vvere seditious and treasonable So that hovv arbitrarily soever King or Parliament yea or Council or any deputed by them did rage or should opprresse injure the Subjects vvhether in conscience body or goods there vvas no remedy nor hope of redresse no petition or supplication how humble soever might be once presented by the grieved subjects yea nor durst they meet together to poure out their complaint unto the God of heaven the hearer of prayers the righteous judge of heaven earth What height of opprression tyranny this is Let all the vvorld judge Twelvethly It is uncertaine yea much doubted if Sr. Iames Turner that singular instrument of barbarous cruelty had any commission form King or Council impovvering him to such illegal exorbitancies whatever he might have had under hand from some Members of Council vvho had most sold themselves to cruelty and to the utter extirpation of all who would not run vvith them to the same excesse of riot sure if any such thing be the records vvill manifest it but since they cashired him and some of his associats and made an offer of causeing him ansvvere for vvhat he had done it is very probable he had no formal commission for vvhat he did and yet since he and others are permitted to live after such crueltyes barbarities and un heard of vvickednesses and no reparation made to the persones injured it is certane he is but too vvell approved in all he did and of vvhat use this shall be vvill appeare afterward Thirteenthly The intent and designe of those poor people who rose in armes was not to dethrone the King to enjure him or to lessen his just and legal authoritie but to resist repel and defend themselves from unjust violence and oppression and to seek reparations of the wrongs done them and the removal of that detestable and abjured Hierarchy the establishing and upholding of which as it was is a great provocation of the anger of God against the land so it was the fountaine and rise of all these horrid oppressions which they suffered and of the making of such grievous statutes and establishing iniquitie into a law and was to be a lasting cause and occasion of violent unjust and illegal oppressions and intolerabel vexations to all the faithful of the land and withal to have security for their lives lands libertyes consciences and Religion conforme to the agreement made with his Majesty and the National Covenant and the Solemne league and covenant which he solemnely swore once and againe and vowed and promised to defend and prosecute in all their ends and that for this end all such lawes made for prelacy and against the work of God and the reformation which through Gods blessing we had attained to might be repealed annulled and rescinded This and nothing else could be the intent and designe of these valient though naked worthyes That they intended no harme to the King or to his just lawful government authority is notoure by the last speaches testimonies of such as were apprehended publickly executed the petition Which they sent in to the Council with William Lauwry Tutor of Blakewood doth aboundantly testify that they would have had the free exerciso of their covenanted Religion freedom from the domeneering tyranny of Prelats their adherents their renewing of the League Covenant doth sufficiently cleare that they intended no insurrection or rebellion against the Kings just and lawful authority for they swore to defend the Kings Majestyes person and authority in the preservation and defence of the True Religion and libertyes of the Kingdoms From these considerations we shall now lay downe the true state of the question thus Whether or not when the whole body of a land Magistrats higher and lower People are engaged by solemne vowes made to the most high God joyntly severally to promove a reformation and to extirpat Prelats the same covenanted work is becom a chief corne stone of the constitution of the Kingdom and one of the mane conditions on which the King is installed on his throne and when these same Magistrats Supreme and inferiour renunce their covenant with God and with the People overturne the work of reformation formerly sworne to make lawes and statutes to fortify this defection to compel all their subjects to run to the same excesse of perjury and wickednesse and execute these lawes upon the faithful stedfastly loyal subjects not in a civil orderly manner but most imperiously and tyrannically with meer force cruelty and the edge of the sword of souldiers leavied of purpose for this very end to crush and oppresse all such as made any conscience of their vowes and engagements unto God and when these barbarous souldiers exceed their commission or oppresse plunder harash spoile rob and pillage the people and lay waste the land without law or expresse order from King or Parliament yea contraire to the expresse letter of the law and when the oppressed have not so much as liberty to supplicate or petition for help or releefe may privat persons without the conduct of a Parliament stand to their owne defence against unjust illegal oppression and tyranny and oppose such as without expresse commission endeavour their utter ruine and destruction though pretending warrant from the superiour Magstrats and allowed of them and seek a redresse of these grievous intolerable injuries and liberty for the free exercise of the covenanted reformed religion with the extirpation of abjured Prelats the spring and fountane of all these miseries already come and to be feared while in the mean time they intend no harme to the supream Magistrat's person or just authority but sweare to mantaine the same in the defence of the true religion and liberties of the Kingdome Or a if you will have it shorter Whether or not when King and Parliament and Council have abjured a covenant overturned a reformation which they solemnely swore to defend in their places capacities and made their subjects do the same and now with illegal force compel the subjects to the like perjury and wickednesse may these privat subjects when there is no hope or possibility otherwise of releefe stand to their owne defence and withstand the mercylesse cruelty of their bloody Emissaries acting without their commission or with their allowance yet contrare to expresse law and seek releef and security for Religion lives lands and liberties having no intention to wronge the King's person or just government That this is the true state of the question is abundantly cleare from the particulars forementioned and I think no Scottish man who knew the then state of affaires and hath not renunced common sense and resolved to beleeve nothing though he should both heare it see it and feele it and it were as
the law of the XII tables so it was in force whatever forme of government was exerced But syes he Prael 9. § 19. Hence it will not follow That People may when they perceive or cry out that they perceive their libertyes hurt in some things take armes without the Princes leave and violate all lawes and dutyes and so raise tumults and seditions Ans Neither do we say so nor resolve to draw any such conclusions therefrom but this is cleare that when the covenanted work of reformation is overturned laudable lawes establishing the same contrary to oath and solemne Engagement rescinded libertyes palpably violated People in humanely persecuted for adhereing to their Covenants c. and unjustly oppressed by the Kings emissaries people may then take armes in their own defence though the King should refuse to consent or should countenance the oppressours carry on that inslaving course Againe he sayes let any read and read over againe that sentence of Cicero and search every pairt of it where vvill he finde any vvarrand for Subjects to rise up against princes to injure them or dethrone them Ans We do not intend to search the sentence for that end it vvill suffice us if hence vve finde ground to conclude the lavvfulnesse of Peoples defending themselves against tyrannizeing Princes in cases of necessity and let him or any for him read and better read that vvhole period and narrovvly consider and examine every sentence and vvord in it and see if he can finde this condemned Ere I come to speak to the other particular I shall from this draw some few things useful for our purpose and 1. It is irrational and meer flattery to cry up and exalt the Soveraignes prerogative in prejudice and to the destruction of that for which both He and His Prerogatives are and were appoynted as subservient meanes the saifty of the People That being de jure his maine end and it being for this cause end that he is endued with such power and hath such privileges and prerogatives conferred upon him and allowed unto him He and his Prerogatives both should vaile unto this Supreame Law the saifty of the People so that when they come in competition The Peoples saifty of right is to have the preheminence 2. Since all other lawes municipal made and established in a free Realme must be subordinate unto this Principal and Cardinal law and have tendency to promove corroborate and establish it Then when any of these Lawes in their letter strick directly at the root of the saifty of the People and thoward and crosse that maine and highest law That law is Eaienus null and really no law So that it is but childish scrupulosity to start at the letter of a law when the Commonwealth is in hazard and it is but brutish ignorance to object the letter of a low against such as are endeavouring the saifty of the people which is the maine businesse and to preserve the Commonwealth from ruine and destruction against which no law is or can be of any force or value but null and of no effect for here it holdeth true that summum jus is summa injuria 3. Since Lawes themselves when in their letter they crosse this maine law must be accounted as no lowes really and de jure and may saifly be neglected and passed over when the Peoples saifty is in no small hazard by the strick adhereing to the letter thereof Then much more may punctilioes and law formalities be laid aside when the Commonwealth is in danger When there is a fire in a City all the formalities of order are not strickly to observed 4. Since The privileges and lawful prerogatives of the Soveraigne must vaile in cases of necessity unto this High and Supreame Law the saifty of the People Then no lesse must the privileges of a Parliament yield unto this for whatever privilege they enjoy it is in order to this end and the meanes must alwayes have a subserviency unto the end and when they tend to the destruction of the end they are then as no meanes unto that end nor to be made use of for that end 5. Though King and Parliament both should conspire together against the good of the Land yet di jure they have no power or authority to destroy that End and whatever they enact or doe tending to the ruine of this maine and principal good which they should have before their eyes as their end is ipso facto null 6. When acts and actings of King and Parliament tend directly and are made and done of purpose to destroy and overthrow the work of reformation in doctrine worshipe discipline and government which was owned and established by lawes with all formalities of law and was avowed by solemne vowes Covenants attestations protestations declarations and engagements of all ranks of People from the highest to the lowest and courses are laid doune to force and constraine People to renunce their Covenant with God to turne perjured apostates and when by acts and actings the fundamental tearmes conditions of our reformed constitution confirmed by unrepelable lawes by the King 's accepting of his Crowne and Scepter and all other Magistrates accepting their places upon these tearmes are overturned and when by an arbitrary and illegal tyranny no man hath security for his life his lands his libertyes nor his religion is not the saifty of the People in danger No man needs to say who shall be judge The Magistrates or the people For all who have eyes to see may judge whether the Sun be shineing or not and all who have common sense may judge in this case When these things are done and avowed they cannot be denyed and no man of reason or religion will deny the inference Hence then it is cleare that no man in reason can condemne the late act of defence which was the only meane left for preserving of that which all government and Governours should level at viz. The saifty of the People both in soull and body their Religion Lives Liberties Privileges Possessions Goods and what was deare to them as men and as Christians howbeit it vvanted the formality of the authority of Soveraine Parliament or Councel No man vvho vvill not deny this axiome can condemne them as Traitors seing they vvere noble Patriots and loyall to that Supreame lavv The saifty of the People As to the other particular concerning the absolute power of the Soveragne We say 1. That the Soveraigne is under obligations to his People and bound limited by conditions we have shewed above which conditions he is bound to observe see Hoen Disp Pol. 9. 2. That the Soveraigne is not exempted from the lawes of God none but profane gracelesse vvreatches vvill deny since he is a creature of God's and a subject to him and his servant Rom. 13. and therefore must not transgresse his lawes under the paine of high treason and laese Majesty It was but a base saying of an impudent whore Iulia
faction which hath now destroyed the work of God and those Rules mentioned And what lyeth latent under board the Lord knoweth 4. He asketh the question if any of the People of the Land be spoiled of their lawful civil libertyes As if a man should enquire if the Sun were risen at twelve houres of the day Our Religion reformed in doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government which was one of our maine civil most lawful libertyes is taken from us The liberty of supplicating which the Law of God the Law of Nature and the Law of Nations allow it taken from us The liberty of free election of Members of Parliament was taken away Liberty of protesting in Parliament was taken away The Kings prerogative is screwed up to such a hieght that it overturnes the true native libertyes of the Subjects Many honest Subjects are cast into prisone no transgression being once alledged far lesse proved against them The due exercise of their Religion as was covenanted is taken away Lawes are not executed in a civil manner as they ought to be among free Subjects Iudicatories are set up and erected without the consent of the People or their Representatives Libertyes and Privileges of brughes and such incorporations are taken away unlesse they will renounce and abjure a lawful religious and necessary Covenant The free exercise of justice especially against Nobles is stopped The Lieges are not ruled by the Lawes of the Land but by the arbitrary will and lust of few Prelates and the privy Council Will he ask now if our libertyes be taken from us or will he call these unlawful 5. He asketh in the next place what one thing the King hath done without consent of the Peoples Representatives in Parliament at vvhich any may except as a grievance It seemeth he is either of a very short Memory or he thinks the High commission-court a very small inconsiderable businesse for the consent of Parliament vvas never had unto this inquisition-court neither of old nor of late And yet this was such an heavy yoke of bondage that made all the land to groan and against which as a most intolerable grievance all the corners of the countrey could give in their exceptions And as for this late Representative so called they have enacted many things contrare to their power and turst as vve have shewed No power under heaven could enact what they have enacted No power under heaven could anul condemne and rescinde lawful Covenants made with the most high God They were not in tuto to rescinde and anull unalterable lawes more firme and fixed then any Lawes of the Medes and Persians For lawes confirmed with oathes and solemne vowes to God are not ambulatory as other politick lawes And therefore all the lawes being good and necessary in their owne nature by the supervenient addition of an oath confirming and ratifying the same became absolutely unalterable by any Man or company of Men whatsoever So that all the lawes made by King and Parliament to the prejudice of the Covenanted work of reformation are intolerable grievances dishonourable to God and prejudicial to the welfare of the Subject and to which neither People nor their Representatives real of supposed could ever lawfully consent 6. He asketh what burden he hath laid upon their Estates but by Law But this is a vaine florish seing all that know what that Parliament was know how prone and ready it was to devote if it could unto the lust of the King the Souls Consciences Estates and all which the Subjects had little regairding either the true liberty or reall advantage of the People CAP. XVII The Objections of others examined WE have now examined all which this Surveyer hath said against us in the poynt of resistence yet that we may satisfy if possible all persons and partyes touching the lawfulnesse of this act of private persons defending themselves and their Religion from manifest Tyranny and oppression we shall remove likewise such other objections as some others are pleased to make use of and which our Surveyer hath possibly forgotten to adduce 1. Obj. Subjects are obliged to performe all dutyes of obedience and fidelity unto their Magistrates and albeit the Magistrates turne a manifest Tyrant every one cannot loose that obligation at his owne hand Hoen Disp Pol. 9. Thes 55. Ans 1. Subjects as we have seen are but conditionally obliged to performe these dutyes unto the Magistrate and not absolutely whether he play the Tyrant or not by Hoenonius his owne confession 2. Though each particular person can not loose the obligation when he will yet when a Tyrant hath by his acts of tyranny loosed the obligation upon his part a body of a People or a considerable part thereof may defend themselves against his tyranny as if there were no obligation betwixt him and them 3. Though the obligation stand uncancelled and not abrogated resistence may be granted for a Sone may resist his Father and a Wife her Husband though the obligation continue firme and not dissolved Obj. 2. By this meanes a window should be opened to all seditions conspiracyes and rebellions Hoen ubi supra Ans Incommodum non tollit argumentum The abuse of a liberty doth not destroy the liberty 2. By this argument absolute and unlimited obedience might be pressed lest if private persones might refuse obedience a door for all sedition and disobedience should be opened 3. By the contrare assertion a door shal be opened to all Tyranny and oppression which should tend not only to disquyeting of the peace but to the ruine and destruction of the Common-wealth Obj. 3. Subjects are to pray for their Magistrates Hoen ibid. Answ True but the consequence is naught Therefore I may not resist them when they tyrannize and oppresse unjustly it doth not follow I must pray for my equalls and inferiours and open enemies whose unjust violence I may notwithstanding resist Obj. 4. A son may not do violence to his Father though never so unworthy for no impiety can be punished by paricide Far lesse may violence be done to the Prince who is the Father of the Countrey Hoen ib. Answ 1. This simile helteth as we have shewed 2. If the Father abuse his power the law will deprive him of it L. 6. Lenones L. 7. C. de Inf. expos L. 2. C. de Parent qui Fil. distrax L. 2. de his qui sunt sui vel alieni Iuris § sed Domin Iust. D. Titul L. ult si quis a Parente manumissus 3. The simile is for us who plead only for resistence as we shewed not for killing and destroying Tyrants 4. If the Sone be a Judge and the Father a malefactor the Son must execute judgement on the Father Obj. 5. Destroying of the head though it be sickly and tender tends to the destruction of the whole body Hoenon ibid. Answ There is no such connexion betwixt King and Subjects as betwixt Head and Members of our natural bodyes A Tyrant may be
Survey of that book entituled Naphtali and of several doctrines in Lex Rex and the Apolog which had been at rest for some considerable time especially Lex Rex after they had been burnt into ashes as being judged no otherwayes answerable but by a fiery faggot till this Man began to rake in the ashes of these dead Martyres and finde some bones of doctrines yet unburnt which he thinketh now to honour with a more solemne burial But with what evidence and demonstration of truth he hath managed the questions handled in this first part thou mayest judge by what is here replyed in vindication of that solemne truth which he endeavoureth according to his poor strength to dethrone and tread under foot Though we have not followed the Surveyers Methode disireing to be as succinct as might be and to cleare that maine question controverted touching the lawfulnesse of privat persons defending themselves and their Covenanted Religion from the manifest violence tyranny and intolerable oppression of the Soveraigne and inferiour Magistrats to the edification of all yet we have not dealt with him as he hath done even with Naphtali the book which mainly he setteth himself against For he is so far from answereing that book of which he offereth a survey that the most part of the grounds and arguments made use of there to prove the thing intended are not so much as touched by him in all this voluminous pamphlet But we have fully examined and answered all which he hath asserted leaving not one material sentence which was to the purpose in his whole book untouched The judicious Reader will finde this true upon search And no man will think we were called to answere the same thing oftener then once though he was pleased to fill up many pages with meer repetitions The methode we have followed all who know what it is to cleare controversies vvill acknowledge to be the most solide satisfying succinct and perspicuous and such against which no man can justly except We suppose also That we have been as plaine and cleare as the nature of this controversy vvould suffer us and some possibly vvill think VVe have been too too plaine but they knovv vvhom to blame for giving us this occasion for vve made it our designe to bring this question vvhich did concerne common people no lesse then the learned seing it was a matter of life and death unto them no less then unto others home so far as was possible to the capacity of the meanest that they might know and be distinct in the knowledge and perswaded of the lawfulnesse of the grounds of their acting in such a vindication of their Religion and libertyes The truth we have confirmed by many arguments reduceing them to their several heads the better to cleare and confirme the matter and to settle the judgments of all in the apprehension of the Truth and all of them we have so framed that every one of the lowest reach may see how they plainely and peremptorily force home the poynt cotroverted with a demonstrative perspicuity and irrefragable strength So that whosoever shall undertake to draw this saw againe must not think to leave any one of all the arguments which are here adduced if he reckon aright he will finde moe then a hundereth which I shall make good if put to it un-examined for if any one hold And I am not afrayed that many of them shall be found feeble the cause vvhich vve contend for is uncontrovertably yeelded seing one reason which is unanswerable is enough to captivate the judgment unto an assent unto the truth one argument deserted of the adversary declareth his cause desperate We have also dealt faithfully and ingenuously touching on every thing vvhich vvas offered to us and vvich vve thought might conduce unto the clearing of this contraversy because we finde some thing belonging unto this question said by the author of the Second part of the Survey vvhich is now come to hand in the last chapter Pag. 263. c We shall a little touch upon that here reserving the examination of the rest of this 2. Part until a fitter opportunity when if the Lord will we shall discover the weaknesse of all his reasonings and vindicate the truths vvhich he setteth himself against vvith as much clearnesse and succinctnesse as may be He cometh in the place now named to consider the defence made by the impanelled unto what was objected or what further defence Naphtali whom after the old manner he stileth the Lybeller makes for them And 1. He tells us They were posed where they had learned that under pretence of Religion it is lawful for Subjests to rise in Rebellion against lawful authority And then addeth That to this Queree this advocate declines to give a direct answere where such a thing is read or could be instructed Answ Who doth not see That this was a Queree utterly unbecomeing such as pretended to occupy the places of lawfull judges in such matters to propose to persones Empanelled upon their life it being nothing but a meer caption like unto that which is called Multiplex interrogation unto which both the impanelled and this Advocat as he calleth him might lawfully have declined to give a direct answere Because it supposed 1. That their riseing was against lawful authority Whereas it was rather a riseing for lawful authority while against persons abuseing their authority and not walking in the right line of subordination unto the Supream Magistrate and Governour of Heaven and Earth but rebelling against him in makeing lawes contrary to his lawes and executing them contrary to his will and command 2. That their riseing was in rebellion while as it was rather in loyalty to God and the Countrey against such as had erected a Standart of rebellion against the High and mighty Prince Jesus Christ our Lord and Supream Governour and were destroying his interests And in loyalty to that Supreme law The saifty of the People defending themselves against manifest and intolerable tyranny 3. That it was in pretence of Religion when as it was really and unquestionably for the re-establishing of our religion reformed in doctrine worshipe discipline government confirmed ratifyed and approved by Solemne Covenants Subscriptions vowes oathes engadgments declarations professions publick actings acts and Statutes of King Nobles persons of all ranks Parliaments and judicatories Higher Lovver Whereas the true Queree was this Where they had learned to rise in their owne defence and in the defence and maintainance of the true reformed Religion against Such in power who were tyrannically oppressing them and destroying the Established Religion contrare to Vowes Covenants Promises Compacts Declarations Protestations Solomne Engagements Subscriptions c. And if the Queree had been thus proposed it might have received a direct answere To wit That they had learned this from the law of God the lavv of Nature the civil lavv the lavv of Nations Sound reason and the practices of Christians both under the
not oure as the light when the Sun shineth which is for the vindication of these poor people will with any face or shew of reason be able to deny this to be the true state of affaires of the present question Hence we see how the Surveyer sophistically fraudulently presents the state which he may well call the great Knot as being no way loosed and laid open by him as it ought to have been of the question Pag. 19. when he sayes Whether meer privat persons one or moe separatly of joyntly when they are or think themselves unjustly afflicted and extremly injuriously handled by the Magistrate or Supreme power proceeding according to lawes aggreed to betwixt himself and the body of the community Whether or not upon supposition that these lawes are not just and right may private persons defend themselves against the violence of the Magistrate thus proceeding even by violent re-offending yea in order to their owne defence cut off the Prince of Magistrat whatsoever or their Ministers and officers standing in their way or when they are punishing them and afflicting them according to law againe Pag. 21. he sayes The true state of the question at this time is when the corruption of these who are in power leads them to abuse their authority either on making unjust lawes or punishing according to these whether meer private subjects should with violence oppose all Magistrats under whom they are from the highest to the lowest together vvith the plurality of the body of that community vvhere of they are members yea and in their ovvne defence destroy them all if they be in probable capacity for such vvork and if they cannot eschew this and preserve themselves yea farther after they have subdued providence so permitting or ordering all the magistratical power and major part of the people they may use a vindicative avenging and punishing povver upon all being only persons of privat capacity and to be sure he repeats the same over againe Pag. 24. and sayes Pag. 26. That the vvay vvhich vve clearly ovvne is That every privat person when so long as they are able or are in probable capacity to acte violently against the Magistâ—ate ought to counter act him violently vvhen he thinks the Magistrate vvrongs him for this must be referred to every mans privat discretive judgment and more to this purpose there and againe pag. 27 he tells us The question is what duty is owed by the subject Unto the Magistrate especially the Supreme for may there be remedies had against the injuries of the inferiour by appellation In case of his mal-administration unjust lavves and sentences according to these lawes or executions according to sentence whether they may violate or violent the person invested vvith authority and not submit unto him but counter-act him by force in self defence against his violence Or if they be bound in conscience or by any lavv of God to submit humbly to vvhat he inflicts although unjustly if they can neither move him by their humble petitions nor can flee from his vvrath or goe out of his dominions and then addeth That the author of Naphtaly and his complices Maintaine That if the Magistrat abuse his povver in making unjust lavves or punishing according to these any private man or company of men that think themselves strong enough for the Magistrate ought never to suffer but use forcible resistence against the Magistrate abuseing his power that al the patience that is required of Christians tovvard oppressing Magistrats is only to beare suffering patiently vvhen they are out of capicity of acting and may not better do and to suffer patiently vvhen they see they cannot represse the violence of the unjustly dealing Magistrate vvith a sufficient contrary violence That it may appeareâ— though none vvho understandeth the controversy readeth what he allaigeth is the state of the question can readily be ignorant of his deceit but may easily perceive his subdolous sohistication hovv far he hath misrepresented the businesse let these fevv particulars be pondered 1. It is one thing to say that private persons may rise and take the svvord of defence in their hand and resist their Magistrats upon the ground of supposed vvrongs or vvhen they think in their privat judgments of discretion that the Magistrat injureth them It is another thing to say This vvay of defence may be used vvhen the injuries are real and not supposed or judged so by their private and erring judgement or discretion only He cannot have the fore-head to say that we maintaine the former nor can he vvith any colour of half a reason inferre that such a maintaine this last do consequentially maintaine the former as men of understanding will easiely perceive and shall be more fully spoken to aftervvard in due place yea suppose that such a consequence could be drawne it were not faire but utterly disingenuous and un-becomeing a faire disputant to bring a consequent which he wire-draweth from his adversaries position or assertion into the state of question and make the world beleeve that his adversary doth positively clearly avowedly assert what indeed he doth not affirme nay nor granteth to follow from what he holdeth 2. It is one thing to speak of resistence made to lawes iniquosly made and yet but tending to the hurt of some private persons in smaller matters it is a far other thing to speak of resistance made to lawes whereby the established religion and the fundamentall rights and basis of the constitution of the realme is overturned and so not only only mens goods or smaller matters but their liberties religion consciences lives and every thing that is dear unto them is in inevitable hazard it were an impudent calumny to say that we maintaine the former 3. It is one thing to say that any private person alone and severally may resist and repel unjust violence offered by the Magistrats of the land and another thing to say that a considerable company joyning together upon just grounds may endeavour their owne faifty Though the lawes of our land will suffer a privat subject to hinder any in the Kings name to possesse themselves of his heritage or of any thing he possesseth till the question be discussed by the civil judges yet we state not our disput concerning what a private single person may do in case of oppression 4. It is one thing to speak of unjust lawes in the general and another thing to speak of unjust lawes made by Magistrats preingadged by solemne vowes and Covenants never to make such lawes and who have given the people all the security imaginable that they should never be troubled with such iniquous lawes This last is our case 5. It is one thing to speak of lawes though iniquous and grievous yet executed legally civily by way of formal legal procedure But it is another thing to speak of lawes in themselves grievous and iniquous yet executed in an unformal illegal arbitrary tumultuous cruel
the King had violated the conditions made had caused burne by the hand of the Hangman a paper containeing explications of some tearmes used by him in the treaty of Peace had denyed accesse to their commissioners afterward when he had signified his willingnesse to heare such as they should send such as were sent were committed to prisone and one of them viz. The Lord Lowdon ordained secretly to be beheaded in the Towr of London and in the meane while warre was concluded against the Realme of Scotland in the King's Council The Earle of Northumberland was made General a Parliament was convocated both in England and Irland for raising of subsidies to the carrying on of this warre The Deputy of Irland with some there had promised much assistence The Prelates of England had offered great summes to carry on this Bellum Episcopale as they named it Scottish shipes were intercepted their goods taken away and the seamen cast into prifsones and miserably handled The sea ports were closed up with frigots The castle of Edinbrugh oppressed the City with their shot and killed many both young and old Were all these things no beginnings of a warre nor no acts of hostility How can he or any else then say that the King was not the first aggressor or that Scotlands warre was not purely defensive 2. As to these things wherein he would make his reader beleeve that the Honest people of Scotland were the first invaders what a malitious fool doth he manifest himself to be for 1. How or what way was his authority invaded was it because they would not receive a masse book in English obtruded upon them by his sole authority without the concurrence of Church or State 2. What lawes were troden upon Weknow no lawes but acts and statutes of a lawful Parliament made for the glory of God and the good of the land and what such were trode upon 3. What way were his proclamations despised Is it to despise a King's proclamation for free subjects to vindicate them selves of what is unjustly laid to their charge in this proclamations by faithful and humble protestations of their innocency 4. What were those castles seised upon Some be like in Vtopia for before this warre was begun Anno 1639. The Covenanters seised upon none of the King's castles When they savv the King bore a hostile minde against them and intended no good they watched the castle of Edinbrugh that more ammunition and provision should not be carryed into it And this was all they did until they were necessitated to put themselves into a posture of defence then they seised upon some houses here there the lawfulnesse of which is demonstrated by Lex Rex the Apology 5. What illegal courts were those which were set up Sure those tables as they were called were no courts assumeing to themselves any judicial determination in any matter of State civil or Ecclesiastical nor conventions for disturbance of the peace or usurpation against authority but meer meetings allowed by the light and law of nature for consultation and advice anent the matter and manner of supplications which they were to present to his Majesty and his Council and of propositions to be presented to the lawful State and Church-judicatories 6. Who were those subjects walking according to the lawes who were persecuted We know of none who were troubled at that time except the Prelates the Troublers of our Israel and all the persecution they met with was that the honest Covenanters did give in complaints against them and offered to make good what they allaiged upon the highest perill and did supplicate the Council whereof some of them were Members that they might not fit there as judges but stand as Rëi and answere for themselves and that the General assembly indicted by his Majesty after mature deliberation and full examination did excommunicate them for high and notorious crymes to be seen in the registers of that Assembly But 2 will these things to judicious persons lay the ground of a lawful warre by the Magistrate against his owne subjects Are these who cannot yeeld obedience unto unlawful commands who humbly protest for their owne innocency who meet together for drawing up supplications and ordering matters thereanent and who give in complaints against the Pests Troublers of the land and exerce Church censures upon the scandalous invaders of the Soveraign's authority And when a King upon these grounds invadeth his subjects with an army of armed men can any man of common sense think that his war is not an invasive vvarre Hath not Magistrats other lavvfull vvayes to defend their ovvne authority and lavves and orderly subjects and to reduce the disorderly then fire and svvord Sure for a King to cut off his subjects is to diminish and annihilate his authority and lavves both And for a King to vvage vvarre against the Body of a land to pleasure Fourteen of a fevv of the basest and most unvvorthy of all the subjects vvould seem to be the result of no grave and sage Council nor vvould it appeare to be much for the Kings honour to have his Soveraigne authority imbarqued vvith a fevv abjects so as if they did sinke to the bottome of the sea It could not swime The next thing and that is the 2 hypothesis he allegeth is That they represent him in their virulent he should say nervous writeings as Nerone ipso Neronior a great persecuter of Religion intending the total ruine and destrustion of the protestant profession and the total ruine and destruction of the whole people of the land Answ They represente him no othervvayes then his owne publicke owned and avowed deeds and declarations did represente him to all the world What was his secret intentions God knoweth but his deeds did declare that he minded no good to the poor Church and State of Scotland for to pleasure a few abjects that had drunken in much Popery and Arminianisme and stirred him up to urge upon our Church 2 Popish publick service book of canons and ordination Popish ceremonies and such Romish trash he sought by fire and sword to reduce us to ashes We shal not now trouble his Urne by speaking to what this Surveyer sayeth afterward This we knovv That he died but vvhether as a glorious Martyr for the true Religion of God vvhich yet may admit several senses so ambiguous is it though vve let it passe in the best and lavves and liberties of the people as he sayeth many doubt At length he closeth his digression thus If there was any thing that could not have a favourable interpretation in that unhappy book that gave therise to the troubles how timely was it retired and great satisfaction and security given for religion If through default of Ministers of State any thing had creeped in that could not abide the test of law how willingly was â—treformed yet all could not sist begun course of violence till through God's dreadful indignation against a sinfull
vve fee that if he loose the old fundations he shakes the throne more then he is a vvarre of And as in many other things through this pamphlet so in this he doth his Master no good service notvvithstanding of the great fee he hath gote for his paines The summe of what followeth Pag. 92 93. is this That none before King James 6. did at their installing enter into Covenant with the People except what one sayeth of Gregory the great who swore to defend the libertyes of the Christian Religion c. which then was Popery and neither did King James himself do it but only Morton and Hume in his name promised somehing like it nay it is doubted if King Charles the first did sweare that oath of if he did he was the first and yet he was aught yeers our King before and it is to be beleeved on good ground that if he had thought his taking of that oath should have subjected him to the coactive and punitive power of the Subjects in every case wherein they or any party of them being meer private persons might think him deficient he would rather have endured any death but it shall be avowed that he did never shrink from the observation of that Godly oath neither hath his Majesty who now reigneth swerved from the observation of that oath hitherto and we are hopeful God's grace shall preserve him hereafter from any such thing Answ 1. We cannot expect that Buchanan studying much brevity would set downe all the formalityes that were used at the coronation of the Kings he only satisfying himself with a series of the succeeding Kings and with a relation of some of the most remarkable passages And therefore it is no good argument to conclude that no such thing was because he doth not make mention thereof 2. other historians name some other Kings beside that Gregory who tooke an oath at their coronation as Corbred the 21. King who swore se majorum consiliis acquieturum That he should be ruled by the counsel of a Parliament whom he accounted his Superiours So in Macbethus his dayes it vvas ordained by the Estates that the King should sweare to maintaine the community of the Realme 3. Whether they did actually sweare an oath at their coronation or not it is not much to the matter for a virtual and implicite Covenant will ground all which we desire and that there was this much cannot be denyed seing Kings who could not reigne was layd aside others who corrupted government were pursued sentenced punished imprisoned and killed in battle or otherwise made to promise amendment And seing we finde bonds laid upon Kings as that in the dayes of Finnanus the 10. King That Kings thereafter should do nothing of any great concernment without the authority of their publick Councel and should not rule the Kingdome according to the Counsel of his Domesticks That he should manage no publick businesse which belonged to the King without the advice and conduct of the Fathers and should neither make peace or war enter into Leagues or break Leagues by himself without the concurrence and command of the Fathers Heads of tribes This was a fundamental Law of the Kingdome and all who accepted of the crowne thereafter must have accepted it upon these tearmes though they had not been in plaine tearmes expressed So Durstus his Successour did sweare the same and therefore in Mogaldus the 23. King his dayes this is called the ancient custome for he ad consilia Seniorum omnia ex prisco more revocavit did all by a Parliament according to the ancient and received custome And because Conarus the 24. King neglected or refused to follow this received custome he was cast into prisone So that the not observing of these conditions made them obnoxius unto the coactive power of the People So was Romachus censured by the Parliament for the same crime So we read of many others censured for their misdemanurs as Constantine the 43. King Ferchardus the first the 52. King Ferchardus the 2. the 54. King Eugenius the 62. King Donaldus the 70. King all which instances many such like do abundantly cleare that the Kings of old were under bonds and obligations if not explicite yet tacite unto the People 4. Whatever can be said concerning the ancient Kings yet now it is past doubt that all our Kings are bound to sweare an oath at their coronation and so are under conditions and Covenant-tyes and obligations and this is enough for our present purpose 5. It was thought suffificient in point of formality legality that the Earle of Mortoun and Hume should sweare in name of the King at this coronation That he should observe the Lawes and according to his power should preserve the doctrine and rites of Religion which were then taught and publickly received and oppose himself to all which was repugnant thereunto And this was the very summe of that oath which was afterward concluded in Parliament to be received by all Kings at their coronation And the reason why they did not put King Iames to that oath thereafter was because he was but once crowned and the oath was to be sworne at the coronation and when King Iames was crowned It was done by others for him as is said 6. Though this man make a question whether King Charles did swear this oath or not at his coronation yet it is notoure that he did and though he beleevetâ— that if the King had thought that his taking of that oath should have been so far mistaken by his Subjects as that he should have been thought thereby to have submitted himself to their coactive and punitive power in every case wherein they or any part of them might think him deficient he would rather have endured any death then so to have cast himself away at the pleasure of malcontented partyes amongst the People taking advantage against him by that oath all which we may give him good leave to beleeve for we assert no such thing yet he must suffer us to beleeve also upon as good ground That if King Charles had absolutely or peremptoriely refused to have taken that oath or had said That he would rule as he listed and have no regaird to the established lawes and whould bring in what Religion he pleased though it were Machometanisme or Poperie or that he did not account himself obliged to the Subjects by any oath he could take The Nobles and others would have scrupled to have given him the Crowne and acknowledged him King And their after practices declared that they looked upon him as a King obliged by tearmes and conditions unto them which when he broke they maintained their right against him with their sword when no other meane could prevaile 7. Though it be true that King Charles the first was acknowledged King sometime before he was crowned yet that was with respect to the same conditions unto which he was by his taking the place virtually obliged
of their accounts should imbrace professe and practise the truth of God and the true Religion reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government Though King Parliament and Council should reject and condemne the same and countenance or command and authorize the practice of idolatry superstition or any false way in the vvorshipe of God or in the doctrine and discipline For no lavv of man can vvarrand iniquity no act or constitution of any Magistrat under Heaven can rescinde or invalidate the mandats of the King of Kings or exempt People from obedience due thereunto No true Christian whatever court flatterers atheists may do can deny this 7. Nor can it be denyed That in Kingdomes or Commonvvealths vvhere once the True Religion reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government hath been received publickly imbraced approved and countenanced by authority ratified by lavves statutes acts declarations proclamations oathes vovves and engagements Though the Magistrates Superiour and inferiour should turne Apostates from that Reformed and received Religion and by their lavves condemne the same and establish corruptions and enforce corrupt practices by penaltyes yet it vvere the duty of all Subjects vvho had any regaird to the matters of their ovvne salvation to adhere to the truth once received and established and vvorshipe and Serve God after the right manner and refuse to obey these iniquous lavves Will any deny such a truth as this except such as have sold soull consciences and all unto the lust of Men or think there is no Religion but vvhat King and Parliament vvill have and consequently if they should enjoyne the imbraceing of Mahomet's Religion or the vvorshiping of Sun Moon and Starrs or of Satan himself obedience must be yeelded 8. If in the forementioned case The Magistrates Superiour and inferiour should combine together and conspire against Christ and his interest and should not only by their acts and statutes banish him and his glorious interests out of the Kingdome but also by their cruel executions labour to force constraine and compel all their subjects or a part of them to the renunceing of the formerly received and avowed truthes and to the imbraceing of the introduced corruptions and so to run with themselves unto the same excesse of iniquity perjury and abhomination Then it is lawful for these Subjects so oppressed persecuted and abused for their constancy in adhereing to the truths once received contrare to all engagements vowes and Covenants to defend themselves against that unjust tyranny and rage and maintaine the reformed truth which is unjustly violently taken from them by force when there is no other probable meane left for them to essay nay when liberty to supplicate or petition is inhumanely and severely under the very paine of Treason discharged The reasons are 1. because we have shewed above that it is most lawful for Subjects to maintaine their lives persons and Estates against the unjust violence and tyrannical oppression of their enraged Magistrates And if that be lawful this must also be much more lawful for as the soul is much more precious then the body so matters that concerne the soul should be preferred to such things as concerne the body And therefore Religion which is necessary for the life of the soull should be with no lesse Zeale care and industry maintained and preserved pure and uncorrupted then what concerneth the lives of our bodyes 2. It is lawful for Subjects to maintaine their natural and civil libertyes by force when no other way can be used lest they and their posterity after them should be redacted unto a state of perfect slavery and bondage worse then that of the Israilites in Egypt And shall it be unlawfull to fight for the defence of Religion wherein is comprised all true and desireable liberty and to save posterity from tyranny and bondage in their souls and consciences much more dreadfull and terrible then the most insupportable and bitter bondage of the body imaginable Shall men be allowed to fight to preserve their owne bodyes and the bodyes of their posterity from the slavery of men and shall they not be allowed to fight that they may preserve their owne soulls and the souls of their posterity from the tyranny of Satan Who but such as either think they have no soulls more then beasts or know not the worth of their souls will deny this consequence 3. It is lawful for Subjects to defend their lives and libertyes in order to the defence of the true Religion and the interests of Jesus Christs when their losseing of these should certanely tend to the losse of Religion Ergo It cannot be unlawful to defend Religion which is the maine and principal thing 4. If it be lawful to maintaine the interests of a King against an usurper whether a stranger or an inferiour Magistrate who is under the King and is seeking to eject him and his interest contrare to his faith and trust Then much more must it be lawful to defend Christ Iesus and his interest when King and Parliament contrare to their sworne allaigance unto him have rebelled and are seeking to dethrone him by their wicked Lawes and Ordinances and to banish him and his interests out of the Kingdome by their tyrannical cruelty inhumane and mercilesse executions Will any deny this but ingrained Atheistical Malignants whose chief character hitherto hath been to preferre man's interest unto Christs Or such as have renounced all faith and loyalty unto the King of Kings and have set up a creature as their only God whom they minde to Worshipe and adore and for whom they minde to fight against all breathing and against the God of heaven also But their weapons shall fall out of their hands when They shall feel the lighting downe of his arme with the indignation of his anger and with the flame of a devouring fire and with scattering and tempests and hailstones and when he shall cause his glorious voyce to be heard If any should Object That because Christ's Kingdome is not of this World therefore his Servants should not fight for him It is easily answered That as hence it will follow that Religion cannot be forced by the sword upon any So it will not follow that Religion should not be defended for then Magistrates should not defend Religion nor Christians should not defend their Religion against the Turks Which is false And hence 5. If it be lawful for People to defend their Religion against an army of infidells Mahometans or Papists invadeing the Land of purpose to spoile us of our Religion and to force us to imbrace heathenisme Turcisme or Popery Then it must be lawfull to defend the same true Religion against King and Parliament when they seek to rob the People thereof and force corruptious upon them because King and Parliament have no more authority from God to oppresse the consciences of their Subjects to corrupt Religion and force corruptions upon them then the Turk or the Pope hath and
therefore no lesse lawfully may they be resisted 6. If privat persons may resist and withstand the Prince and Parliaments when they sell them and their land and heritages unto a forraigner to the Turk or such an adversary Then much more may they withstand them and defend their Religion when they are selling it by their apostatical acts and thereby selling them and their Souls unto Satan the God of this World 9. When Religion by the constitution of the Kingdome is become a fundamental law and a maine article and cardinal condition of the established Politie and upon which all the Magistrates Supreme and Inferiour are installed in their offices Then may that Religion be defended by private subjects when their Magistrates have conspired together to destroy the same to enforce the corruptions of their owne braine The reasons are 1. because it is lawful to defend the just and laudable constitution of the Realme in so far as Religion which is a principal fundation-stone of this constitution is subverted the constitution is wronged and the fundations thereof are shaken 2. In so far the Magistrates are no Magistrates And therefore they may be resisted Magistrates I say in so far as they overturne the constitution are not Magistrates for that is a maine pairt of their work to maintaine it For upon the constitution hang all the libertyes and all the good and necessary Ends which People have set before their eyes in the setting up of governement and His owne being as such the subversion of that subverts all and declareth the subverter to be an enemy to the Commonwealth and an overturner of the polity and this is inconsistent with being a Magistrate 3. In so far as they overturne or shake the fundations they cannot be seeking the good of the Community but their owne with the destruction of the Common good and this is the mark and true character of a Tyrant And when they seek not the good of the Community they cannot be looked upon as Magistrates doing their duty but as Tyrants seeking themselves with the destruction of the Commonwealth Therefore in so far they may be resisted 4. In so farr The compact the ground of the constitution is violated and as Magistrates in this case in so far fall from their right in so farr also are People liberated from their obligation so that if They become no Magistrates the Subjects become no Subjects for the relation is Mutual and so is the obligation as was shewed above Therefore in this case Subjects may lawfully resist and defend their Religion which is become the principal condition of their constitution and of the compact betwixt King and Subjects 10. Where Religion is universally received publickly owned and countenanced by persones in authority ratified approved and established by the lawes and authority of the land There every person is bound and obliged before God to maintaine and defend that Religion according to their power with the hazard of their lives and fortunes against all who under whatsoever colour and pretence seek to subvert and overturne the same and to hinder any corruption that King or Parliament at home or adversaries abroad would whether by subtilty or power and force bring in and lay hold on the first opportunity offered to endeavour the establishment of Truth and the overturning of these corrupt courses which tend to the perverting thereof And the reasons are because 1. When the True Religion is once embraced and publickly received That land or Commonwealth is really dedicated and devouted unto God and so in a happy condition which happy condition all loyal subjects and true Christians should maintaine and promove recover when nearby or altogether lost And therefore should do what they can to hinder any course that may tend to recal this dedication to deteriorate the happy condition of the Realme and to give up the land as an offering unto Satan 2. By this meanes they endeavour to avert the wrath and anger of God which must certanely be expected to goe out against the land if defection be not prevented and remedyed For if but a few should depairt wrath might come upon the whole much more if the Leaders turne patrones of this defection But of this more in the next chapter 11. Much more must this be allowed in a Land where Reformation of Religion in doctrine worshipe discipline and governement is not only universally owned publickly received and imbraced nor yet only approved authorized ratified and confirmed by publick authority and the lawes of the Land But also corroborated by solemne vows and Covenants made and sworne unto God by all ranks and conditions of People from the King to the meanest of the subjects in a most solemne manner and that several times re-iterated in which Covenants all sweare to Maintaine and defend this Riligion with their lives and fortunes and to labour by all meanes lawfull to recover the purity and liberty of the gospel and to continow in the profession and obedience of the foresaid Religion defend the same and resist all contrary errours and corruptions according to their vocation and to the uttermost of that power that God puts in their hands all the dayes of their life as also mutually to defend and assist one another in the same cause of maintaining the true Religion with their best Counsel bodyes meanes and whole power against all sorts of persons whatsoever And Sincerely really and constantly endeavour in their several places and callings the preservation of thereformed Religion in doctrine worshipe discipline and government The extirpation of Popery Prelacy Superstition Heresy Schisme Prophannesse and whatsoever shall be found to be contray to sound doctrine and the power of godlinesse And to assist and defend all those that enter into the same bond in the maintaining pursueing thereof And shall not suffer themselves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination persuasion or terrour to make defection to the contrary party or to give themselves to a detestable indifferency or neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the glory of God the good of the Kingdomes and the honour of the King but shall all the Dayes of their lives Zealously and constantly continue therein against all opposition and promote the same according to their power against all lets and impediments whatsoever Now I say in such a case as this when after all these engadgments and covenants a courte of defection is carryed on by a strong and violente hand by King and Parliaments and there is no meane left unto Private Persones when violented and constrained to a complyance by acts and tyrannical and arbitrary executions of either preventing their owne destruction in soull and body or preserving the reformation sworn unto or recovering the same when corrupted and of purging the land of that dreadful sin of perjury and defection They may lawfully take the sword of just and necessary defence for the maintainance of themselves and of their Religion This
the oppressed truth and cause of God and valiently seek and plead for the truth and with their Mother the Church when all is corrupted left a bill of divorce be given her And this is something more then our Surveyer will allow And vvhat way this shall help us vve shall see aftervvard Novv vve must examine What the Surveyer sayeth He Pag. 46. after some rambling after his wonted manner misrepresenting of the thing wich vvas said in Naphtaly as any judicious reader will perceive so that we need not trouble ourselves to discover the same unfaire dealing so oft as vve meet with it lest vve should waiste paper and paines as he hath done in repeating the same things over and over againe He tells us That It is not to be doubted that Religion is the chief interest that men and Christians should look after and where it becomes a legall right and the Magistrate who beares the sword leads the way no doubt privat persones may follow in the violent defence of it against all opposeing the Magistrate the law and themselves in owneing of it Answer This cold laodicean will give Religion the best word but no more He granteth that it is the chief interest that men and Christians should look after and yet so cautious is he in showing the manner how they should look after it that in effect he doth postpone it unto many other lower concernments For 1. it must become a legal right ere they defend it 2. And when it is become a legal right they cannot defend it unlesse the Magistrate lead the way But what if a virgine hath not a legal right unto her chastity by such a law as that leacherous King Ewen the 3. made shall she not be allowed to defend the same And if she shall shall not men be allowed to maintaine their Religion though some iniquous act of Parliament take the legal right of it away Yes doubtlesse if it be the chief interest Againe what if an unjust act take away a man's right to his heritage shall he not be in case to defend it against robbers 2. By his second caution it would appear that if an army of Turks or Tartars were landing in Scotland to robus of our Religion we might not resist unlesse the Magistrate did lead the way But might we not in that case defend our lives and lands If he should deny it I know few that will be of his opinion and if he grant it he must not account Religion the chief interest Againe what if the Magistrate shall permit Subjects to defend their Lives and Libertyes against invaders though he should not lead the way Will he allow it in that case Then he must preferre these unto Religion for Religion he sayes must must not be defended but when the Magistrate leads the way Neither sayes he can it enter into a Christian heart that it is to be surrendred unto the arbitrement or pleasure of any power in the world nor of any Magistrate over us as this man wickedly suggests is done Answ The Surveyer is this wicked person who not only suggests but upon the matter affirmes it and avowes it for what is it else then to surrender our Religion to the arbitrement of Magistrates to say that we may not stand to the defence thereof unlesse they will both authorize it with their law and also lead the way when any oppose it That which we will not maintaine without the approbation and conduct of another we wholly give up to the disposeing and pleasure of that other What he sayes concerning our present case shall be considered in end once for all Then Pag. 47. Whatever may be said concerning private mens resisting the powers that urge them to idolatry or false Worshipe or invading their lives if they will not so do comes not home to the present case Answ He would do well to speak plaine and not look with a double face Either he thinks it lawful in this case to resist or he thinks it unlawful if he think it unlawful to what purpose doth he make mention of it as a different case from what is presently under debate And will not any see that if he deny this to be lawful our Religion is wholly given upto the arbitrement of the Magistrate If he think it lawful he must then grant that Religion may be defended even when the Magistrate who bears the sword doth not lead the way and why then it should not come home to our present case I do not see for he doth not lay the stresse of his answers on the inconsiderablenesse of the ground of the resistence though here and there He hint at that but upon the unlawfulnesse of resisting the Magistrate who beares the sword Now this ground faileth him here But he ads Yet Lactantius word Lib. 5. c. 20. is to be well remembered by all private persones Defendenda est Religio a privatis omnibus non occidendo sed moriendo Answ Then according to Lactantius it must be unlawful to defend Religion even when the Magistrat urgeth to idolatry invading lives if they will not do it yea if this be generally received as a truth The People of Scotland might not defend their Religion against an army of Pagans Turks or Tartars if the Soveraigne should not concurre Which I know not who would assent unto But he will come off with a few notes Pag. 47. c. That whereas Naphtali said That to be violented in Religion which cannot be without an unjust force either on mens persons or on their goods is the most wicked and insupportable of all injuries He thinks such a word should have been better guarded lest all coactive power of the magistrate in matters of Religion might seem to be disowned which would favoure such as are for absolute toleration But what needed this Could he think that the author of Naphtaly did imagine That to be violented in any Religion whether true or false was such an insupportable injury Or that it was his minde to plead for an universal toleration What ground had he for so thinking Sure that had been prejudical to his hypothesis which this Surveyer himself will not call a false Religion will it not suffice to say he meaned a violenting in the true Religion No sayes he for what Sectary will not pretend that he is violented for the true Religion which he will avow is so according to his conscience and it is this man's principle that every man in his discretive judgment is judge of the justice or in justice of his owne sufferings and accordingly must determine a nent his resistence to the violence Answ 1. Then it seemeth his guairding of it in his owne words saying It is true to use violence upon any in their persons or goods to bring them to an external false Religion or to drive them from the true otherwise Religion cannot be violented is the greatest of injuries Is not sufficient to salve the Magistrates
become of the many acts of Parliament ratifying and approving these Covenants Are not all these cast avvay are not vve cast open unto the assaults of that bloody Beast what meaneth the great increase of the number of papists so that the very Parliament it self in their statute 8. sess I. a mok-act never put into execution sayd that the number of Iesuites Priests and Papists did now abound more then ever they did under the Government of his father and grand father What meaneth the rescinding and anulling the first act of the 12. parl of K. Iames 6. holden Anno 1592. in all the heads clauses and articles thereof in their act 1 sess 2. whereas that act did not also ratify and approve presbyterial government but did also ratify and approve all privileges libertyes immunityes and freedoms granted by his hieghnesse his Regents in his name or any of his predecessours to the true and holy Kirk established within the Realme and declared in the first act of Parliament Anno 1597. and all and whatsomeever acts of Parliament and statutes made before by his Highnesse and his Regents anent the liberty and freedome of the said Kirk and particularly the first act of parl Anno 1581. and all other particular acts there mentioned and this act Anno 1581. ratifieth all preceeding acts particularly that made in the reigne of Queen Mary Anno 1567. anent abrogating all lawes acts and constitutiones canons civil and municipal with other constitutions contrare to the Religion then professed and all posteriour acts namely such as abolished the Pope and his uspurped authority that anulled the acts made against God's word and for maintainance of Idolatry the act ratifying the confession of faith of the protestants of Scotland the act abolishing the Masse and for punishing hearers and sayers of the same acts made anent the admission of them that shall be presented to benefices having cure of ministry anent the King's oath to be given at his coronation anent such as should beare publick office hereafter anent teachers of schools anent the jurisdiction of the Kirk anent the true and holy kirk anent the ratification of the liberty of the true Kirk of God and Religion anent such as are declared not to be of the true Church And also the said act Anno 1592. ratifieth all other acts made in favours of the Kirk since the yeer 1581. So that by this late Act made Anno 1662. all the acts made in favours of the Church and of the protestant Religion are annulled and rescinded for there is no exception added but the said act in all its heads clauses and articles is declared null and voide Where is then our legall security for our protestant Religion and Libertyes of the Church Sure these things presage no good to the protestant Religion But 2. What way the King doth advance this blessed truth of the saving gospel if he meane hereby the protestant Religion we are to learne For his publishing in print that the Papists have been faithful subjects to him and his father whilest others under pretence of Religion had involved the Kingdomes in blood and by these Papists meaning with others the irish rebells who for promoving the Romish bloody designe executed that bloody Massacre in Irland the report whereof made all protestants to tremble and to stand astonished giveth us but small hopes that so long as he is of that minde he shall ever do any thing effectually for promoving or maintaineing the Protestant interest His advanceing of Papists to greatest places of publick power and trust England in Parliament Council Court Counteyes and the Army speakes rather an encourageing and inviteing of persons to turn Roman Catholicks His provideing a house for Fathers and friers speaks out no good intention and designe Let the Surveyer read what is said to this purpose in the Preface to Naphtaly 3. He tells us that the King is willing and desirous that the lawes be put in execution against Papists and perverters of sound doctrine But how cometh it then that there are no sayers of Messe and seminary Priests sentenced according to the law Did ever the King write to the Council for suppressing of Popery as effectually as he hath done for suppressing of conventicles Or did he ever chide the Council or depose any member thereof or any other inferiour Magistrate upon the account of their negligence in this But be it whose fault it will sure we are there is more care taken to search out conventicles then the meetings of Papists or Quakers Is the Towne of Edinburgh under such a bond to suppresse meetings for Masse and others of the like nature as they are for suppressing of honest Protestants meeting for the Worshipe of God according to the purely reformed Religion Did ever any Arch-Prelate procure an order from his Majesty to stirr up the leazye council to diligence in this matter Wherein I pray doth either the Kings willingnesse or the vvillingnesse of the Council or of other Inferiour Magistrates to have the lawes against Priests vigorously put into execution appear And where are we then when all Magistrates from the highest to the lowest connive at if not encourage countenance and approve of Papists and Popish idolatry and the true Worshipers of God are hunted out cast into prisones banished into America and Tangyr and made to suffer such inhumane Barbarities and all to pleasure the perjured Prelates who are more afrayed of a few honest seekers of God then if legions of Papists were swarming in the Land knowing how soon they would be willing to imbrace these serpents in their bosome and joyne with them to root out the Protestant interest whileas they hate the truly godly with a perfect hatred as being of principles irreconcileable with theirs and having ends before their eyes diametrically opposite to what these intend Yea where are we when almost all the Rules proposed by Adam Contzens the Jesuite for introduceing of Popery in his Polit. Lib. 2. Cap. 18. are so exactly followed as when he adviseth that 1. They proceed as musitians do in tuneing their instruments gradually and piece by piece 2. That they presse the Examples of some eminent Men as a meane to draw the rest 3. That Arch-heretikes that is most Zealous Protestants be banished all at once or if that cannot be done saifly by degrees 4. That such be put from their dignities and all place power of trust 5. That Protestant Religion be made odious by loading such of their opinions as are most obvious to a harsh construction 5. That they foment the quarrels that are among Protestant and strengthen that party that is most ready to comply with Rome 7. That they discharge and hinder all private conventicles of Protestants 8. That severe Lawes be made and rigorously executed though not against all yet against the most dangerous Who seeth not what a conformity there hath been and yet is betwixt the practices of this Apostate Popish Prelatical and Malignant
when a beanch of judges in civil matters conspire together to oppresse by their unlavvful and unjust decreets palpably such and not our to all vvhen they are deposed and others put in their places the oppressed may get his cause righted and reparation of dammage of them Or vvhen a justice generall manifestly palpably murdereth the innocent he may be made to ansvvere before another put in his place if this may be done as I judge in poynt of conscience it may so may the other be done with Parliaments 3. If Parliaments conspire to overturne Religion Lavves Liberties and thus destroy the Republick I judge vvith L. R. Pag. 240. that the sounder part if they be able may resist and hinder so far as they can that destruction and ruine of the Republick Neither ever shall he prove that this is a ground for Eternal confusion O sayes he Any lesser part when they have or think they have will and sâ—rengh enough to through their businesse will undoubtedly call themselves the sounder part and labour to beare downe the corrupt plurality Answ This remedy to prevent destruction and ruine to the Common-wealth may be of the Lord though it should be abused by sinful men for the best thing may be abused And it is not the meane allowed by God and Nature which layeth a ground for eternal confusion but the abuse of the meane maintained whereof we are not guilty But we have had abundance of such rotten consequences from him who knoweth better what it is to deceive the simple with sophistications then to satisfy the judicious with solid reasons Then he addeth But the Christian Reader may easily see how hard this Author is put to it and for all his saying that according to God's Law Kings must be punished as well as others yet is he forced to acknowledg a Supremacy of power in some not punishable by any but by God Ans This is but what we heard just now and whether true or false it helpeth him nothing Have that Supremacy of power which is not punishable by any but by God who will if the King have it not the King's life is not secured And if he say if any have it the King must have it True if this rotten malignant and parasitical ignoramus can make no bad inferences but he hath already so often discovered vanity in this way of argueing that we cannot account him infallible And therefore let him prove his consequence for we know him better then to take any thing from him upon trust Well what way doth he clear this of Lex Rex For sayes he Pag. 389. when he hath given all power to the Parliament over the King he objecteth to himself who shall punish and coërce the Parliament in case of exorbitance He answeres posterior Parliaments and Pag. 211. he sayeth by the people and conscience of the people are they to be judged let all our Nobles and Parliaments hearken to this Answ In the first place cited Lex Rex is not speaking of Parliaments power over the King as this squint-eyed Surveyer thinketh but is handling that question whether or not Monarcy is the best of governments And is shevving in vvhat respects it is best and in vvhat respects it is vvorste and shevveth hovv a mixt Monarchy is best and then ansvvereth some objections And to that vvhich some might object That Parliaments might exceed their bounds and who should coërce them He ansvvered That posteriour Parliaments might do it and so there vvas a salvo in that mixture of governmemt 2. In the other place he is shevving vvhat relation the King hath to the Lavv and that he is not the sole Lavv maker nor sole supreme judge And ansvvereth that objection That the three Estates as men and looking to their owne ends not to Law and the publick good are not fundamentalls are to be judged by the King viz. That they are to be judged by the people and the conscience of the people Why calleth â—e the Nobles and Parliaments to hearken to this What absâ—â—dity inn reason is here Who ever head of this sayes he that one Parliament posteriour should punish the prior Their acts they may retract indeed but to punish them for their acts is most absurd because the prior Parliament in the capacity of that judicatory had as much povver as the posterior States men vvill vvonder at this doctrine that Members of a Parliament should be punished for their free votes by a succeeding Parliament and far more at the subjecting them to the conscience of the People Answ 1. It is no small punishment and cöercion to a Parliament to have all their designes consultations and conclusions overturned which may be done by posteriour Parliaments 2. If Parliaments by their free votes sell Religion and the Liberties of the land unto the Turk and so destroy the same and betray their Trust I see not vvhy they ought not be punished for their paines If they should enact and put to execution the act vvhen made That all vvho vvill not bovv and burn incense to an idol should be brunt quick I see not vvhy they may not by a posteriour Parliament be questioned and punished for that innocent blood vvhich they have shed 3. His reason to the contrary is not good for they never had povver or commission for overturning the ends of government and destroying the Commonvvealth if the Magistrates of a Brugh betray their trust dilapidate the rents and revenues of the city sell and dispone the rights and privileges thereof may not the succeeding Magistrates call them to an account for that notvvithstanding that in the capacity of that judicatory they had as much povver if any as the posteriour 4. Wonder at it vvho vvil that vvhich is right is right and it is consonant to equity that the consciences of the People be so far judges of vvhat is done by their Representatives as not to suffer them in their name and by any povver borrovved from them to destory the Commonwealth and to overturne the fundations of Religion and Liberty c. But then sayes he another objection he makes posteriour Parliaments and People both may erre He ansvveres All that is true God only must remede that What can he make of this Well then sayes he if Parliaments or People destroy or murther persons innocently God only must remeed that there is no povver on Earth to call them to an account Who sees not that at length the author is driven to acknowledge a power which if it deviate cannot be judged by any on earth Answ Lex Rex is not there speaking of particular acts of injustice Or iniquity but of the whole ends of government And so if Parliaments and People concurre and joyne together to overturne all the world sees that there is no remedy on Earth Neither needed he to say that he was driven to this seing it was so obvious to all who have eyes in their head Though God hath appoynted
JUS POPULI VINDICATUM OR The Peoples Right to 〈…〉 and their Covenanted R 〈…〉 Wherein the Act of 〈…〉 and Vindication which was interprised Anno 1666. is particularly justified The lawfulnesse of private Persons defending their Lives Libertyes and Religion against manifest Oppression Tyranny and violence exerced by Magistrats Supream and Inferiour contrare to Solemne Vowes Covenants Promises Declarations Professions Subscriptions and Solemne Engadgments is deâ—â—â—strate by â—any Argumâ—â—ts Being a 〈◊〉 Reply to the first paâ—â— of the Survey of Naph 〈…〉 c By a Friend to true Christian Liberty PSAL. LXXIV Ver. 20 21 22 23 〈…〉 e unto the Covenant For the dark places of the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty O let not the oppressed returne ashamed Let the poor and needy praise thy name Arise ô God plead thine own cause Remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee dayly Forget not the voice of thine Enemies the tumult of these that rise up against increaseth continually HOS I. ver 7. But I will have mercy upon the house of Judaâ— and will save them by the Lord their God and will not save them by bow nor by sword nor by battel by horses nor by horsmen Printed in the Year MDCLXIX CHRISTIAN READER IT will not I suppose be very necessary to make any full Relation or large Deduction of the occasion and first rise of this debate The same being not only fresh and recent to all both Friends and foes who have been Spectators of the great and wonderful workings of God in our Land but the memory thereof if it could be so soon obliterate is revived a fresh by the constantly renewed acts of Tyranny and oppression which from yeer to yeer The Powers acted by the same Spirit of Enimity to the Cause and Interest of Christ are exerceing upon the account thereof So that the Continual rage and Constant opposition which the ingrained adversaries of the Glory and Kingdome of our Lord Jesus Christ are dayly acting and making against all who desire to keep a conscience void of offence both towards God and Man and to remember with some sense and feare their solemne vowes and Sacred engadgments unto the Most High will not suffer us to forget how that After our Land was solemnely deâ—â—uted unto God by Solemne Covenants and indissoluble 〈◊〉 and the defence of the Reformed Religion in Do 〈…〉 Worshipe Discipline and Government become 〈◊〉 condition yea the basis of our political constituâ—ion The King not only by his solemne and sacred oath swearing and by his hand writeing subscribing and so fully owneing and approving the same but upon these tearmes and conditions accepting the Royal Crowne and Scepter in the day of his solemne inauguration The People also upon the same tearmes promiseing all subjection and obedience in the Lord And afterward in full Parliament confirming ratifying and approving the same and thereby giving all the security which either Reason Law or Religion could expect or require That all the Ends of these holy Covenants should have been in all time comeing really sincerely and constantly prosecuted by King and Nobles and all ranks of persons within the Land with one heart and minde and consequently That the evils particularly That accursed Hierarchy fully and for ever abjured in these Everlasting Bonds should never be countenanced owned or favoured far lesse re-intro-duced and established and after for our owneing of these necessary things and of the Kings interest in subordination thereunto we were invaded by the English and the Lord who for his his owne holy Ends saw it necessary and doth whatsoever he will in Heaven and in Earth so disposeing overcome and brought into bondage full Ten Years and at length The King who was forced to flee out of all his Dominions returning in such a remarkable and signal way without blood as might have engaged his heart more firmely then ever unto that God who had done such rare and unexpected things for him and made him more then ever fixedly resolve to owne Him and his holy Interests according to his former Vowes Oathes Subscriptions Covenants and Declarations and rationally ascertaned his Subjects that these necessary and good things should not only never be overturned and ranversed but also with greater Zeal and resolution established confirmed and prosecuted then ever formerly how instead of this No sooner did the report of his Majesty's returne come abroad but all the generation of malignants who had ever been heart enemies to the work of God which was carryed on in the Land did lift up theiâ— head insult over the People of God with all their might according to their ordinary insolency spew out their Venome against the work of God and at length obteaning power did raze the same unto the very foundations anull and rescinde all Acts all Covenants all Resolutions and Conclusions which had been made and taken for setling and secureing the Reformed Religion in Doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government condemne all which had been done in carrying on the Work of Reformation as pure and manifest Rebellion and having re-intro-duced and established abjured Prelacy with all it 's concomitant abhominations did enact and enjoyne most tyrannically a full conformity unto all these abhominations and presse in a most horrid and arbitrary manner the faithful Servants and seekers of God to a complyance with these accursed and ever to be abhorred courses and upon their simple refusal did violently and barbarously eject the faithful Servants of Christ banishing some out of all the three Dominions incarcerating others after thev had imbrewed their hands in the blood of the best of our Nobility and Ministry and chaseing by their irrational and brutish acts multitudes of them from their flocks and familiars and then having in an antichristian manner thrust in upon the People a crew of the basest and naughtiest wreatches the Earth did bear by their cruel and tyrannical acts compelled constrained the couscientious seekers of God to accept of countenance owne and constantly hear such as lawful Ministers lawfully called and sent of God and when honest People considering both the way of their entry to be Antichristian their doctrine false and erroneous their conversation scandalous and abhominable their qualifications rather such as sute the publick Ministers of Satan then the called Servants of God their whole deportment a manifest demonstration to all onlookers that they were never called of God unto that work and considering how iniquously their owne faithful Pastors and Fathers had been thrust from them and how by their solemne Oath they stood obliged to the constant keeping of a perfect antipathy unto every part and pendicle of that abjured Hierarchy and unto what was contrary to sound doctrine and to the power of godlinesse and to the work of Reformation and Reformed Religion in Doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government did forbear to yield obedience unto these antichristian and iniquous Lawes did by their arbitrary and barbarous executions what by
law and under the gospel not onely at home but also abroad When Naphtali said That it was a cleare beging of the question to suppose that the late riseing vvas only in pretence of Religion This Surveyer answereth That it is a very poor quirck And why so He should know sayes he that in ordinary language a thing is said to be done under pretence of another whether the pretension be yet dubious or under controversy or whether it be falsely made or trely Answ Such language as this may be ordinary with him it may be and his complices that corrupt fraternity with whom pretences are real and real things are pretences but sure to all such as understand plaine language this queree did praesuppose that the riseing was not really but in pretence for Religion Did ever these in power make it out or offer to make it out that it vvas not really for Religion Naphtali said more over That the Queree it self seemed to imply aud grant That for subjects to rise in armes really for the defence of Religion against the invasion of the powers under the pretence of lawful authority is both lawful and laudable This sayes the Surveyer is as vaine a quirck How so for sayes he let it be so that the objection was meaned only of riseing upon meer pretences of Religion will this inferre that therefore there might be a riseing upon real intentions for Religion against the Magistrate Answ Sure to all of common sense it sayes that the proposers of the objection did yeeld so much having hinted nothing to the contrary Did they say giving but not granting it lawful to Subjects to rise in armes really in defence of Religion c. Why then might it not have been taken for granted that the objecters durst not condemne this especially seing the maine stresse did lye upon that supposed pretence Ay but he tels us That he affirmeth That upon neither of the two insurrection against the Magistrate is lawful and that these people did not rise really for Religion but to maintaine themselves in the course of atheistical contempt of Religion and God's ordinances to pull down all authorities in the â—and as their advocat prâ—fesses and justifies their so dâ—ing and to destroy these in their innocency whom they had appoynted to death Answ His affirmations and assertions are but weak and beggarly proofs though he strengthen them with manifest and notorious lies And whether there be a truth in what he here affirmeth or not we leave the Reader to judge when he hath read and considered what we have said in the following vindication Next Some texts of Scripture vvere objected as 1. that 1 Sam. 15 ver 25. Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft To which sayes Naphtali Pag. 156. One of themselves did roundly and clearely answere that the sentence being spoken by the Prophet to the King because of his disobedience and contempt of the command of God and not to Subjects would sooner conclude his accusers then himself to be a rebel This the Surveyer Pag. 264. calleth a very poor answer And yet so pertinent and plump that it stopped the mouth of the accusers filled their faces with shame But why was it such a poor answere For albeit sayes he that high rebellion immediatly againsi God be principally meaned yet the soveraigne Magistrate being the Lord's deputy and bearing the image of his Soveraignity upon Earth whom he commands to reverence and obey and of whom he hath said yee are Gods Psal 82. the despiser of the Soveraigne Magistrate a rebel against him doing his duty is a rebel against God Answ Those words Doing his duty were very well added But sure when such are rebelling against God enacting things diametrically opposite to his law and testimony persecuting the Subjects because of their adherence to the lawes of God to their vowes and Covenants and by force cruelty overturning the covenanted Religion destroying the interests of Christ the true and lawful liberties of the people and the common good they are not doing their duty nor carrying themselves as the deputies of God bearing the image of his Soveraignity but rather as manifest and avowed Rebels to God And therefore what ever can be said from this place to prove it rebellion and as the sin of witchcraft for subjects to despise the Soveraigne Magistrate and to rebel against him doing his duty neither from this place nor any other can it be demonstrate that the late Risers vvere guilty of Rebellion Did not the author of Naphtali tell him 2. That riseing up against authority it self the Ordinance of God and disobeying the powers therewith vested standing and acting in their right line of subordination is indeed rebellion and as the sin of witchcraft but to resist and rise up against persons abuseing sacred authority and rebelling against God the Supream is rather to adhere to God as our liege Lord to vindicate both our selves his abused ordinance from mans wickednesse and tyranny What meaned he then to say the same thing which Naphtaly had said Is this to answere his adversary And not rather to yeeld the cause Ay but left we should take these words doing his duty as importing any confession He addeth Yea suppose we are never to follow the Magistrate when his commands are contrary to God for that were to leave our lineâ— of subordination to God yet when he swerves and goes out of his line to take the sword against him is but to study to cure his sin by our owne And because the King one way leaveth his line of subordination to God therefore to leape out of our owne line in that subordination in another way Answ This Man speaketh contradictions when he maketh a supposition that we are not to follow the Magistrate when his commands are contrary to God and yet sayeth if we do follow we leave our line of subordination to God We see what the Man's Spirit would have carryed him to if he durst have vented it But how proveth he that this is our sin or a leaping out of our line of subordination to resist tyranny and men abuseing their authority to the subversion of Religion libertyes and the common good of the Subject we have proved the contrary and answered all which he or his collegue the author of the former part hath said and shall be ready to say more when any nevv ground is given The next passage of Scripture which was objected was Mat. 26 52. To which said Naphtaly it was sufficiently answered without any reply by one of these impeached whom they accounted distracted though without the least appearance of impertinency by opponeing Luke 22 36. What now fayeth the Railing pamphleter Certanely sayes he This libeller seemeth not to be far from some measure of distraction while he alloweth the distracted man's answer as sufficient Who of sound judgment will think that a scripture is sufficiently answered by produceing another which seemeth contradictory thereto
all that can be drawne from the scope of the place to wit that when God hath so plainly declared by his providence that there is not so much as place left for praying that the thing where with we are threatned may be avoided but that we must suffer and that then it is our duety to seek to be strengthened with all might according to his glorious power c. That in this case to take the sword is unlawful this I say we willingly grant but if he would wrest the words further to make them say what he would have them he erreth not knowing the scriptures nor attending to their scope Yea it may be questioned if the Chiefe Priests Scribes and Elders who sent out that band of souldiers vvere lawful civil Magistrats at this time having power and authority from God to use such civil force and coaction and not rather usurpers But we need presse this no further having ground sufficient to maintaine what we assert even yeelding this unto the adversaries After that Naphtali had considered these passages of Scripture which were objected to the impaneled He proposed two other to be examined The first vvas Ioh. 18 36. If my Kingdome vvere of this vvorld then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered to the jevves Vnto which Naphtaly answered thus As the intent scope of our Lord's ansvver vvas to clear himself of that calumny objected against him by the Iewes that he made himself a King in opposition to Caesar So the meaning of it is plaine and obvious to vvit That our Lord's Kingdome is not of the Nature and for the Ends for vvhich other Kingdoms of this World vvere instituted but vvholly spiritual for declareing the Truth thereby gaining souls unto glory Whence as our Lord vvould there inferred that he came not to conquer to himself disciples by outvvard force and thereby to gaine follovvers to the spoiling of Caesar and other Princes So it is vvithout all shaddovv of connexion thence to conclude that a people having received the blessing of the gospel and Kingdome of Jesus Christ should vvithout resistance suffer themselves to the manifest dishonour of God and the hazard of the eternal damnation of themselves and their posterity to be impiously and sacrilegiously spoiled and deprived thereof vvhen they are in capacity to defend the same This the Surveyer accounteth Pag. 268. an extravagant exposition and why Is not sayes he Christ's plaine meaning to declare the nature of his Kingdome to be spiritual by this that none of his servants vvere engaged merely upon this account and under this formality that they vvere his Servants to fight violently for him This vvas security enough to Caesar all Magistrats for ever that none of his subjects should take up armes in his quarrel against them but should only do so vvhen Religion came to be a Lawright defensible under the Magistrats protection against all forreigners But there is not the least hint of his saying that he came not to conquere disciples to himself by outvvard force his intention being meerly to give assurance that violent resistence to our proper Magistrates even in his behalfe is unsuteable to his Kingdom Ansvv 1. Mr Hutcheson on the palce tels us that Christ's scope here is expresly to ansvvere to the accusation concerning his Kingdome and speaks so much of it negatively as might satisfy Pilate That it might vvell enough consist vvith the saifty of the Roman State Therefore he shevveth that his Kingdome was not a wordly Kingdome and for proof thereof he instanceth how far he was from aspireing to a Kingdome by force of armes in that he would not so much as permit his servants to fight in his defence as they offered to do vvhen the jewes came to take him This in my apprehension is not one and the same with the Surveyer's glosse and lesse discrepant from Naphtali's glosse then is his 2. What though it should be granted that none of Christ's servants vvere engaged meerly upon that account and under this formality to fight violently for him Will it hence follow that Christians in a Kingdome may not stand to the defence of the professed Religion received and sworne to by King and all rankes against manifest tyranny and oppression I see not the consequence seing they may do all this as civil Subjects good countrey men and loyal patriots and this is enough for us 3. Himself dar not deny but even Christians sujects of Christ may take up arms in his quarrel in some cases for he granteth it may be in this case vvhen religion cometh to be a Law right defensible under the Magistrates protection against forraigners But is there any ground for this exception alone in all Christ's answere 2. If there be no ground more for this then for others vvhy may not we put in our exception as well as our adversary putteth in his 3. If it become a Law right why may it not as well be defended by private subjects as other Law rights and civil libertyes are and may be even against Magistrates 4. Shall it not be defended even when it becometh a Law right against forreigners but under the protection of the Magistrates Then if Magistrates will not concurre private persons may not defend their Religion by force of armes against an army of Turks Papists or Heathens comeing to presse all to Mahometanisme Idolatry or Heathenisme What height of absurdity were here 5. Since Christian Magistrats are Servants to Christ as well as Christian subjects Why shall it be more lawful for them to engage in Christ's quarrel under this formality that they are his servants then for meer subjects seing Christ maketh no exception here of one or other nor distinction among his Servants and seeing this seemed to be as little security for Caesar as the other if the scope mentioned by the surveyer be the true scope 4. The particular mentioned by Naphtali is more suteable to the true scope then this vvhich the Surveyer mentioneth For the question vvas not touching resistence to our proper Magistrates in Christ's behalfe But whether Christ was a King or not to vvhich Christ answered That hovvbeit He vvas a King yet his Kingdome vvas consistent vvith Caesars Kingdome And as he come not to conquere Subjects to himself by outvvard force so he minded not to erect a temporal Kingdom by armes Naphtaly did adde further The truth whereof together with the hypocrisy of our adversaries may soon be discovered if the question be but stated in the tearms of one forraigne and independent prince's invading another meerly upon the account of the Christian faith and whatever solution or evasion they shall herein make will as exactly quadrate to the case in hand it being almost ridiculous to conceive that the greatest-aggravations of invasions of this kinde to wit that it is made by a prince upon his owne subjects whose profession he himself is principally bound to maintaine should import any speciality and
allovv vvhy shall it be unlavvfull for a considerable part of the land to defend their Lives and Estates their Libertyes and Religion by forcible resistence made unto the Magistrat's Emissaries cruel bloody souldiers vvhen that moral resistence by petition vvhich yet no rational man can account resistence it being rather an act of subjection is contrare to all lavv and equity denyed and also the legal resistance by plea in court is not admitted Doth the municipal lavv of the land permit the one resistence aud vvill not the lavv of nature and nations vvhich no municipal lavv can infringe be a sufficient vvarandice for the other in case of extream necessity If it be said The Soveraigne hath law and right upon his side in this case which he hath not in the other till the law discusse it Ans The Law and Right which he hath on his fide in this case is but meerly pretended as in the other case and is lis sub judice Neither is he to be both judge and party in this case more then in the other againe if it be said that in this case He acteth as a Soveraigne executeing the lawes but in the other case he acteth only as a private person It is answered 1. That even in the other case He may pretend to be acting as a Soveraigne following executeing the lawes as well as in this 2. The Soveraigne as Soveraigne cannot oppresse nor do wrong therefore even in this case when he doth manifest injury unto the subjects contrare to his place vow and promise he acteth but as a private person and not as Soveraigne 2. If it be lawful for private person to warde off and defensively put back personal injurious assaults to the manifest and immediat peril of life without any colour of deserving of reason of law or judicial proceeding Why shal it not also be lawful for private persons to ward-off and defensively put back the injurious assaults of Emissaries to the manifest peril of Life Libertyes States Lively-hoods Consciences and Religion without any rational or real colour of deserving of reason of law of God or nations or judicial proceeding Shal it be lawful for one private person in the defence of his owne life to warde off such illegal extrajudicial and irrational assaults of the Soveraigne himself and shall it be unlawful for a body of a land or a considerable part thereof in the defence of their lively-hoods and so of their owne lives and of the lives of their posterity of their Consciences of their Libertyes and Religion all secured unto them by all bonds vowes Covenants Statutes and Actes imaginable to warde off the irrational furious illegal extrajudicial and mad assaults of the Soveraign's bloody Emissaries Sure rational men vvill see that vvhatever reason vvil evince the lavv fulnesse of the resistence in the former case the same vvill more strongly and plausibly conclude the lavvfulnesse of resistence in this case 3. If it be lavvfull for a private vvoman to defend her chastity dearer to her then life by violent resisting the Soveraignes attempts lest by non-resistance she should be guilty and oh if all the vvomen of the nation vvere of this temper Shall it not also be lavvful for private persons to defend their Lives Liberties Consciences and Religion dearer to them then their Lives yea and defend their chastity too by violent resisting of the furious attempts of the Soveraignes bloody Emissaries sent of purpose to constraine and compel them to perjury vvhen their non-resistence according to their povver and opportunity could not but be interpreted a voluntary and base quiteing of the cause and truth vvhich they vvere bound before God to maintaine vvith their lives and fortunes 4. If it be lavvfull to resist habited notour and compleat tyranny against all appearance of lavv manifestly tending to the destruction of a body of a people or a greater part thereof by hostile furious actions Shall it be utterly unlavvsul to resist notour tyranny yea compleat and habited though not as to re-iterated acts yet as to the ground laid dovvne of a most compleat and habited tyranny against all appearance of divine lavv or just and right humane lavves vvhich should be consonant thereunto tending to the destruction of the Covenanted-libertyes privileges and Religion of the vvhole body of the people and also unto the actual destruction of the libertyes states lives and lively hoods of a great part thereof by hostile furious actions 5. If resistence be lavvful in the case of violent attempts or destruction of all known legall libertyes and the beeing of religion according to lavv Shall resistence in our case be unlavvsul vvhen all the true libertyes of the subjects once established by lavves re inforced by vovves Covennants solemne engadgments and all bonds imaginable and the very being of our Religion as reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government ratified approved established and confirmed by lavves oathes Covenants vovves and promises vvhich lavves so re inforced vvith oathes protestations attestations declarations solemne vovves and Covenants are by all right divine and humane irrepelable being not only in themselves good and necessary but also becoming hereby sacred vovves to God vvhich must be payed being also fundamentall tearmes of the constitution of the reformed Republick 6. If in the case of Vendition Alienation of and giving the Kingdome to strangers violent resistence be allovved shall it not also be allovved in our case vvhen a land that vvas solemnely devoted consecrated and given avvay to God by solemne vovves and Covenants and the same ovvned approved ratified and confirmed by publick acts edicts proclamations declarations lavves and statutes of plenary and even as to all formalities compleat Parliaments made up of all the Estates of the Realme and the King also is novv treacheroussly and iniquosly forced to depart from their former principles to abjure their former vovves and Covenants to change their God to condemne his vvork and by most abhominable and ever to be-abhorred acts and statutes sold and alienated unto a popish prelatical and malignant faction and designe under vvhich the faithful and true seekers of God's face have and can expect lesse liberty for their consciences then if the whole Kingdome vvere delivered up into the hands of the great Turk Thus vvee see these concessions help our cause vveaken the adversaryes not alittle let us novv proceed to speak to another particular vvhich vvill help us also 2. The authors of Lex Rax and of the Apologetical Relation have sufficiently proved that the late vvarre carryed on by the Parliament of Scotland against the King vvas lavvful both in poynt of lavv and conscience And if that vvas lavvfull as it vvas and shall be found to be vvhen he and all his complices have done their utmost vvith all their lying cavills false calumnies reproaches and vvhat not that Hell can hatch to disprove condemne the same a vvarre raised by the subjects in their owne sin-lesse self
obey him in the Lord. Peter Martyr also sayeth that not only King and People covenanted with God but the King also with the People and the People with the King and thereafter that the King was bound to rule the People according to the Lawes equity Secundum Iura Leges and the People promised to obey him Zanches more fully tells us there was a Covenant betwixt the King and the People as uses to be betwixt the Prince and Common-wealths The Prince undertaketh to defend the Kingdome Lawes Equity and to be a keeper and defender of the Countrey and of Religion And upon the other hand People promise obedience and fidelity and such expenses as are necessary for keeping up the Majesty of the Prince c. Now what sayes our Surveyer to this He tells us Pag. 96. That it was also made upon an extraordinary occasion extraordinaryes cannot sound ordinary rules Answ How doth he prove that it was meerly upon the extraordinarynesse of the occasion that this Covenant was made he might as well say that the crowning of him giving him the testimony making him King and making a Covenant betwixt the Lord and the King were extraordinary and so could not found ordinary rules yea and that it was extraordinary for the People to sweare allegiance unto him But he hath two things remarkable to his purpose as 1. That he is crowned made King before the Covenant is made which crosseth the antimonarchists who assert the King cannot be made King until he make the Covenant with the People that he gets the crowne and royal authority covenant wise and conditionally Answ Antimonarchists properly so called are against all Monarchs limited or absolute or doth he account them all antimonarchists who say that the King is a limited Magistrate then we know what to think of the Monarchists and Royalists of him and his party 2. He knoweth himself that the series or order of the relation of a complex businesse is not alwayes just according to the series of the things done but be it so this maketh for us in the former instance of David's Covenanting with Israel Which is mentioned before their making of him King 3. But suppose the King had refused to enter into Covenant with the Lord or with the People for mention is made of both Covenants after his Coronation might they not for all their solemnities in crowning of him have refused to have ownned him as King 4. But to put the matter beyond all debate we finde compareing the two places together That beside the Covenant betwixt Iehojadah and the Rulers of Hundereds c. mentioned 2. King 11. 4 and 2 Chron. 23. 1. which was rather a Covenant betwixt themselves to depose Athalia and to set up joash to put down Idolatry and to set up the true worshipe of God as the English annotations the Dutch say then a Covenant of fidelity or allegiance to the King as he would have it we finde 2 Chron. 23. 3. a Covenant made betwixt the Congregation and the King and this was before he was crowned or made King which Covenant as the English annotators say was a mutual stipulation betwixt the King and Them That the King should maintaine the true worshipe of God the peace of the Kingdome and privilege of the subjects and that the People should maintaine the King and yeeld unto him his due The next thing he sayeth is That it is not told us what the tenor of this covenant is Diodaâ— seems to say that Iehojadah made them sweare allegiance and fidelity to the King but how shall it be cleared that it was conditional with a reserve of coactive punitive power over him Answ Of this coactive power over Kings we are not now speaking and he but playeth the fool to start such questions without ground 2. That it was a conditional Covenant the scope of the place cleareth for if they had not expected thaâ— their condition had been better under his reigne then under Athaliah be like they had never resolved to have ventured their lives and estates for him and if the Covenant had not been conditional they could have had no rational expectation of the bettering of their condition from the young King Againe if it was not a conditional Covenant The King could with no more certainty have expected their dutyful obedience then They his faithful government 3. It is true the matter and tenor of the Covenant is not expressed but the nature of the act doth abundantly cleare what it was and that it was such as the English annotators have expressed 4. If Diodat say it was nothing else but the Peoples swearing allegiance he speaketh without ground for it was a mutual Covenant a Covenant betwixt King and People But sayes he suppose all the Kings of Judah made such covenants with the People yet will any judicious man force the Particular customes of that Nation on all Nations that might be best for that Nation that was not simply best their customes without a law of God bearing a standing reason cannot be obligatory on others lest we judaize too much Answ 1. We are not now pressing their practice as our only warrand but by their practice we prove the lawfulnesse of the King 's being brought under conditions and obligations to the people which Politicians Lawyers and Divines use to do 2. He must show why such a practice was best to them not also to other nations 3. We Judaize not more in this then in crowning and making of Kings though I grant they do who use the ceremony of anoynting with oile 4. We have the Law of Nature which is the law of God bearing a standing reason of this as was shewed above 5. Yea that lavv of God mentioned Deut. 17. 15. c. Limiting the Prince shovveth that it was the Peoples duty unto whom that is spoken when they were to set a King over themselves to provide for these conditions so that as they might not de jure set a stranger over them neither might they set any over them who vvould not engage to keep the conditions vvhich they were to required of him v. 16. 17. 18. 19. and these Conditions of the King being held forth unto them sayes that they were impowered to stipulate such of the King whom they were to create and that poynts forth a Covenant to be made betwixt them and their King power also in them to restraine the King from transgessing these conditions as Iosephus tels Ant. Lib. 4. cap. 14. Si autem fuerit alias c. â— e. But if otherwise a desire of a King shall adhere unto you let him be of your stock let him make much of Justice and other vertues and let him know that there is most wisdome in the lawes and in God let him do nothing without the advice of the High priest Elders neither let him assume to himself many vvives nor seek after abundance of riches nor
Egypt had not his propriety Gen. 45. 9. No man might then defend his owne right by law against the Soveraigne but he might take what he pleased from whom he pleased and give to whom he pleased 10. Then the King could not properly buy or sell with his Subjects 11. Nor could Subjects make any barganes amongst themselves without his consent 12. Nor could they exerce any acts of charity because charity must be of Mens owne Esa 58 7. Ecc. 11 1. 13. Yea Subjects could neither perform a duty nor fail in a duty in the matter of goods if all were his 14. Subjects could not be enjoyned to pay tribute unto the Prince contrare to Rom. 13 6. 15. It is contrare both to the Law of God and nature see Timpl. ubi supra 6. Hence Soveraignes are not proper proprietors of their Kingdomes Because 1. there are other qualifications required of them then is required of ordinary proprietors 2. The People then could never change their Soveraignes 3. The Soveraigne might sell and dispone his Kingdomes as he pleased which Royalists themselves wil not grant 4. Kingdomes then should come in amongst bona fortuna 5. His place should not be properly a function or office but a proper possession 6. Several Kings both in Scotland elsewhere have been hindered from dilapidating the revenues of the crovvne or by gifts and other contracts deteriorating the Kingdome and punished for so doing 7. Would rational men give themselves up for a prey to one that they might be saife from becoming a prey to others 8. How should then a Soveraigne be chosen for the good of the Kingdom if he might do with it what he pleased sell it or dispone it to the Turk or such like 9. Paul by commanding that tribute custome be given to him supponeth some other thing see Althus poli cap. 24. n. 35 37. 7. Nor so much as usufructuaryes For 1. they may not lay their Kingdomes in pledge as an usufructuary may do 2. Nor can they give them freely away Nor 3. may they do with them what they please as usufructuaryes may do with what they have by that right See Iun. Brut. vind cont Tyr. q. 3. p. mihi 205. 8. The Soveraigne's power is properly a fiduciary power such as the power of a Tutor of Patron for to this end purpose was He created of the People that he might defend them from injuries and oppressions He is appoynted over them by God for their good and is to seek that mainly 2. though he hath his power by way of compact yet it is not a compact ex condigno such as betwixt buyer and seller upon valuable prices and considerations 3. His power is limited restricted and he is bound to conditions as we shewed 4. He may not as was said dispose of his Subjects and of their lives as he pleaseth 5 if he sell his Kingdomes Royalists grant he may be dethroned therefore he hath no other power then of a Tutor Publick Servant or Watchman 6. His power is over his Subjects as it is over the law of God and religion but over those he hath no other power but a ministerial Tutorypower He is to take care for them ex officio as a special pawne committed to his trust to see that they be not wronged or violated see Althus polit cap. 24. n. 43 44 45. Adrian the Imperour used to say Ita se Remp. gesturum ut sciret Populi esse non suam Hence we draw these arguments for resistence of Soveraignes by meer private Subjects in cases of necessity 1. If it be lawful for Children to resist their Father when enraged against them and seeking in his fury to destroy and cut them off whithout any violation of the Law of God enjoyning Children to obey and be subject to their Parents in the Lord Then it is lawful for Subjects though private persons to resist the fury of their enraged Soveraigne when he is seeking in his cruelty and rage contrary to compact oathes and vowes to destroy Them and their Religion But the former is true Therefore c. The Assumption cannot be denyed by any rational person It being most just and rational that when the Father is taken with a distemper in his braine and in his madnesse seeketh to destroy or cut the throates of his Children They may joyne together binde his hands pull the weapon out of his hand and defend themselves the best way they can The connexion of the proposition is certane for the most the adversaries can make of the Soveraignes power is that it is paternal and that he is parens patriae the Father of the Commonwealth yet seing natural Fathers may be resisted by their natural Children in case of necessity without the help or conduct of Magistrates Why may not also private Subjects without the conduct of a Parliament defend of themselves in case of necessity against the fury and rage of their civil father when he by his bloody emistaries is seeking to undoe them But next we may draw the argument from the lesse to the more If it be lawful for Children in cases of necessity to defend themselves against and to resist the unjust violence of their enraged Father Then much more is it lawful for private subjects in cases of necessity without the conduct of Parliament to defend themselves against and to repel the unjust violence of their Soveraigne For there is not such a connection betwixt the Soveraigne and his Subjects as betwixt Parents and their Children as we have abundantly cleared And againe if some of the Children may resist the unjust violence of their Parent and of others of their Brethren joyning with their enraged Father to cut them off that they alone may enjoy the whole inheritance or for some such ends Then far more may a part of the Common-wealth resist the Prince's unjust Tyranny though he hath the other parts of the Commonwealth concurring with him to their destruction For the argument followeth as I said à minori ad majus from the lesse to the more And the union tye relation betwixt Brethren Sones of the same Father is as great yea greater then the tye union and relation betwixt one part of the Commonwealth another this relation being but political and in itself no wayes indissoluble but the other natural and indissoluble 2 If Wives may lawfully defend themselves against the manifest and unjust violence of unnatural and enraged Husbands and repel in case of necessity violence with violence without the conduct or concurrence of other Magistrates Then it is no lesse yea much more lawful for meere Private Subjects in cases of necessity to resist without the help and conduct of a Parliament the furious and unjust assaults of their enraged Soveraigne But the former is true as all will grant Therefore c. The proposition is cleare from this That there is not so great a tye betwixt Prince and Subjects as betwixt Husband and
some small and inconsiderable triffles unto which some small and inconsiderable hurt is opposite nor shall we say that any extraordinary thing is to be attempted in a Commonwealth against the lawes whensoever any leading popular man or bold rhetoricator or a Démagog shall say that Princes and Magistrates have violated the lawes done injuries to the people and neglected their duty yet he must give us leave to say That the saifty of the people is in hazard when it is manifest and notour so as they who run may read it that lawes once established and for the future good and through security of the subject by Oathes and Covenantes corroborated and made irrepelable by any Magistrate higher or lower are annulled condemned and rescinded nay the Covenants whereby the land was devouted to God and their Religion secured to them and the fundamental law or ground of the Constitution and condition on which the Soveraigne was admitted to his throne overturned and trode under foot All forced to condemne their former actions and Covenants Vowes Oathes Prayers Teares Fastings Fightings c. by subscribing contradictory condemnatory and rescissory acts and declarations and forced to run counter their owne oathes and Solemne Engagements otherwise to be exposed to ruine by arbitrary mulcts fineings imprisonements quarterings cruel and inhumane usages plunderings vastations depopulations and the like Is not this equivalent to incursions of forraigne adversaryes Is not this depredation committed by wicked subjects Is there not here impious and horrible acts of tyranny But he will have the word People taken for the Prince distinct from the People or in a collective sense for Prince and People together He must be a strong rhetoricator indeed that will perswade any to beleeve this seing there is no reason in the world for it For though we should grant that among the Romans it vvas sometimes used to designe not only the plebeians but also the equestral crder conjunctly as in that axiome Senatus populusque Romanus The senate and the people of Rome And that sometimes it did designe the Fathers the knights and the Plebeians conjunctly yet it will not follovv that it is so it is so taken in this axiome for if vve should follovv his ovvne rule viz. That collective vvords should be collectively taken unlesse the opposite vvhich is annexed require othervvise And vvith all make use of this ovvne vvords prael 10. § 19. A romana gente c 1. e I have told that this axiome is come to our hands from the Romans and now I adde that in the 3 book of Cicero de legibus that sentence is frist found for any thing I know yet as he testifieth himself taken out of the ancient lawes of that nation and copied out of the very letter of the law Now this Cicero after he hath described and explained in the preceding book the lawes pertaining to Religion and the worshiping of the Gods at length in the third book he comes to rehearse these lawes which concearne the Republick and the Magistrates where these words are to be found Regio Imperio duo sunto iique praeeundo judicando consulendo praetores judices consules appellantor militiae summum jus habento nemini parento ollis i.e. illis salus populi suprema lex esto he sayes to these the chief law should be the peoples saifty Now who are these those viz. Who were endued with King'ly power and had the chief disposall of the militia c. It vvill then be as cleare as can be that the opposite which is added or annexed doth sufficiently show that the vvord People in this axiome is to be taken for the People as contradistinguished from the Magistrates and not for People and Magistrate conjunctly far lesse for the Prince as distinct from the People And doth not this same sentence of Cicero's fully confirme our Glosse and say that Princes and Magistrates as such ought mainly to designe the good of the People over whom they are set to have that for their end in all their publick actings whether in making or in executing lawes How then can he say that this axiome is rather to be understood of the Prince alone then of the People alone But for this he tells us That the ancient Fathers did esteem of them as next unto God ad inferiour to him only and that the People of Israel 2 Sam. 18 3. Did preferre the saifty of the King unto the saifty of all the rest and in the Lament 4 20. He is called the breath of our nostrils To all which it is easily answered 1. That all this will not prove that Princes are bound by reason of their office only to seek their owne good greatnesse and power or to preferre that unto the good of the People and not rather designe as their proper and principal end the promoving of the good and saifty of the People committed to their charge 2. The Fathers might have spoken so of the Emperours as they were then de facto and in regaird of their supereminency but notwithstanding of that they and their supereminency both was subordinate unto the good of the People and was ex natura rei but a meane for that maine and great good 3. It is true in some cases and at such a nick of time as that was 2 Sam. 18. The losse of a good King when he is the maine person hunted for by the adversaries would prove more destructive to the Commonwealth then the losse of ten thousand and this rather confirmeth the axiome then weakeneth it for it was upon the account of the publick good of the Commonwealth that the life of King David was preferable to the lives of many 4. It is not said that His life was better then and preferable to the lives of the whole body of the Commonwealth 5. That metaphorical expression Lament 4. she weth only how useful steadable the King would be unto them even a necessary mean to keep them in a politick life as to a Commonwealth and so it sayeth that his whole designe as a Magistrate should be to procure their good 6. Moses a good Prince did preferre the Peoples life unto his owne and David did the same 1. Chron 12 17. and these do abundantly confirme our sense He replyeth further That it was no wonder that among the Romans from whom we have this axiome the Peoples saifty was the principal law seing in that democratical government the People were the Supreame powres Ans This is but a meer shift for even in a democrat governm the Peoples saifty is distinguished from the Supreame power which is to level all to this maine end the saifty of the People 2. Cicero told us that the Consuls and Praetors were bound to propose this end unto themselves so we finde that the People whose saifty is the Supream law are distinguished from these who whether in a Popular or Aristocratical govern excerced the supreame povver 3. This same is insert in
and no Scottish man vvill deny it as to our king For if he or any for him should pretend a right to their inheritance and intend an action of lavv against them they may defend themselves by lavv or if he should take possession vvithout a sentence of lavv They might pursue him and his tennants or vvho ever came in his name to take violent possession and procure letters of ejection and the like Yea by force they might vvithstand any that should come to take violent and illegal possession The consequence is hence clear That vvhatever ground a man hath to defend his rights and possession by lavv the same ground he hath to defend his right by force vvhen he cannot use the legal meane for if the King had real right and not he unto vvhat he possesseth it vvere as unlavvful to vvithhold the King from possession of his ovvne by quircks of lavv as by force Againe This legal resistence is no resisting of the Ordinance of God but of the man vvho seeketh no enjure No more is this violent resistance a resisting of the ordinance of God but only of the man vvho abuseth his povver Hence 3. If the King have not absolute power to do and command what he will Then when he crosseth the rules prescribed by God's law and Man's law without any injury offered to the ordinance of God he may be resisted by his Subjects over whom he thinketh to exerce an absolute arbitrary and tyrannical power The reason is because That power which is not the ordinance of God may be resisted without the lest injury done unto the true ordinance of God But this absolute power is no ordinance of God it is not appoynted of him nor allowed of him Therefore c. But say Royalists Though that absolute and Tyrannical power be not simply from God yet it is so from God that no man can lawfully resist it Answ 1 If it be so from God as that it may not be resisted then it is from God and is the ordinance of God for it is the ordinance of God that cannot must not be resisted But sayes the Surveyer Pag. 37. It may be easily seen that subjection to the power opposite to resistence is all alongs enjoyned viz. Rom. 13. whether the power be rightly used or otherwise If it be rightly used subjection without refuseing active obedience is required if it be not rightly used subjection without resistence violent or forcible repelling of the power is required upon this formal reason and ground Because even when the power is abused it remaines a power ordained of God although the abuse of it be not ordained even as a man's eye remaines his eye although sometimes it is not rightly used The formal reason of the subjection and non-resistence pressed is not the right use of the power but because it is a power ordained of God however perverted in the use by man Answ 1. By this mans doctrine The King might not be resisted if he should turne another Nero or Caligula or should deal with us all as the Turk doth with his subjects or the King of Spaine with his slaves in America If he should fill ditches with his living subjects and to satisfy his lust and pleasure should tumble them be thousands downe a precipice into the midst of the sea yea though he should bring in an army of Turks or Tartars to destroy all his subjects young and old Though he should sell and give away the whole land unto the Turk or any forraigne Tyrant and become the most habited not our and compleat Tyrant and should against all appearance of law manifestly seek the destruction of the whole land man wife and childe and of the very being of religion according to law and of all known libertyes and should force and compel with armed heathens all his subjects great and small to offer sacrifice to the Heathen Gods and the like For in all this and the like there is but an abuse of the power and the power is still of God however it be abused and because it is a power ordained of God this abuse must be submitted unto without the least resistence is not this sufficient to make all men abhore this man's principles 2. He must say that it is not possible to resist the abuse of the power but the power it self must be resisted and so such as do resist the most dreadful tyranny imaginable do resist the ordinance of God which is most false and absurd 3. If the abuse of the power be not from God then such as resist this abuse do not resist that which is ordained of God but that which is not ordained of God And therefore resisting of the abuse of the power is no resisting of the ordinance of God 4. Subjection is only required to that which is the ordinance of God because subjection is required when and where and so far as resistence is prohibited Now resistence to the ordinance of God is only prohibited and not resistence to the carnal and bloody lusts of men which is rather the ordinance of the devil then the ordinance of God 5. The vvrong use or abuse of the eye may be resisted hindered and obstructed without any injury done to the eye it self So may the wrong use or abuse of Magistratical power be resisted without any vvrong done unto the povver vvhich is of God 5. It is false to say that all resistence of the abused power is forbidden upon this formal reason and ground because even when the power is abused it remaines a povver ordained of God Because the abused power is not at all ordained of God nor never vvas it is no part of that povver vvhich God ordained a povver to murther the innocent to kill the vvidow and fatherlesse and to oppresse the people of God is not of God God never appoynted that povver of David's to murther Vriah and to commit adultery vvith Bathshebah These vvere no acts of the Magistratical povver ordained of God but acts of lust the vvickednesse 7. If this reason hold good we must never resist by refuseing active obedience let him command what he will for his sinful and unjust commands are but the abuse of that power which is ordained of God and the power even when abused by giving out edicts and mandats according to this man remaineth a power ordained of God as a man's eye remaines his eye though sometimes it is not rightly used Now how will he loose his owne argument what ever answer he give here it will helps us out Sure if a man many refuse obedience to an unjust command of an abused power without doing injury unto the power which is ordained of God it will be no lesse cleare that a man may refuse subjection to and resist abused power without doing hurt unto the power which is ordained of God And I Desire that the Reader vvould seriously notice this and see how all he objecteth is answered by it the wicked
the hazard of calling Magistrats to account judging condemning and dethroning them and the like Having thus cleared how little ground he hath to cry out so against Naphtaly and his party as the sanguinary faction as he doth Pag. 83. and to prosecute that dispute as he doth in the following Pages we will not have much difficulty in answering what he hath said but first let us prosecute our owne businesse and shew what real power People have without their Magistrats in the maintaining and reforming of Religion And 1. It is lawful yea necessary for every private person whether the Magistrates Superiour and Inferiour give their countenance concurrence or consent thereunto or not to purge their hearts and reforme thier lives and to walk in all the wayes of God's Commandements Our Surveyer himself granteth this Pag. 84. for sayes he every one is bound to amend one and so all will be more easily amended Very ture And if this were done our work were at an end and himself would be a Hangman to his owne pamphlet unlesse he think himself exeemed from that duty of reformation and that he hath a dispensation to lie slander calumniate and blaspheme the work wayes and People of God 2. It is the duty of all private persones notwithstanding that idolatry superstition or any other corruption in the worshipe of God be established by authority or countenanced and encouraged or conformity there to pressed to keep themselves pure from such courses as provoke the eyes of God who is a jealous God and will not give his glory to another This is undenyable by all who are not professed Atheists and who know another God then a clay creature and who know that it is better to obey God then a Man Our Surveyer granteth in the forecited place that every one of the people ought to reforme themselves from all real corruptions in the worshipe of God But it may be he maketh this real an open door for him and his fraternity to escape by and so conclude that he and they are arived at the hight of perfection because forsooth they are fallen backward and have a minde to goe backward and never to advance and so fall not under the compasse of this duty But corruptions will be real corruptions though they account them perfections 3. It is the duty of private persons to rebuke admonish exhort reprove observe edify and provoke one another to love and good works Lev. 19. 17. Mat. 18. 15 16. Rom. 15. 13. Col. 3. 16. 1 Thes 5. 11. Heb. 3. 13. and 10. 24. 25. And thus instruct one another in the right wayes of the Lord perswade move and induce them by motives and arguments and all meanes possible to imbrace the truth and to forsake errour or any false way Even though the Magistrates should prohibite and discharge this and by their command and authority should establish errour and corruption and banish truth with their edicts and proclamations Our Surveyer granteth Pag. 84. that no man should say am I am brothers keeper but by faithful instruction warning reproof strive to save others from the evil of the time and places wherein they live And yet he knowes who are persecuted upon this account of meeting together for these and such like ends to strengthen the hands one of another that they faint not in this evil day and to save one another from the evils of these times as keepers of conventicles and seditious disturbers of the peace 4. When there is any corruption in the reformed Religion whether in doctrine worship discipline or government creept in or any corrupt sinful practice come in use and abounding in a land and these corruptions not only connived at by the Magistrates but also countenanced approved and authorized it is the duty of all the faithful Ministers of Christ to be laying out themselves to the utmost in their pastoral functions for the suppressing of these corruptions and enormities notwithstanding of any prohibiton of the Magistrate whose power is not privative in this case to the contrary Though this be abundantly cleared and confirmed by the practice of all the faithful Prophets and Apostles of the Lord both under the Old and under the N. Testament yet we all know how impiously and tyrannically this is denyed to the honest Ministers of Scotland who left they should speak any thing against the rageing evills and abounding corruptions both in matters of opinion and practice which hasten the curse and wrath of God upon the land and make us ripe for destruction are not permitted to preach uncontroverted truthes and the undenyable grounds of Christianity But however this piece of tyranny and persecution be established by law yet the law of God stands unrepealed in full force and vigour by this law all who have a trumpet and a mouth should set the trumpet to their mouth and cry aloud and not spare and both privately and publicky labour thus to reforme the grievous abuses that abound in the land 5. Private persones may let Magistrates command or discharge what they will yea are bound to obey the whole some exhortations and admonitions of Ministers and others who faithfully declare the minde of God and discover abhominable corruptions crying abhominations notwithstanding of any law to the contrary Imbrace and practise the true Religion and reject the corruptions This is certane for it is God's minde and will that his commands be obeyed rather then mans and if Ministers and private persons be bound to exhorte rebuke warne reprove admonish move and perswade it is Peoples duty to hearken to and obey these good and necessary exhortations rebukes warnings reproofs admonitions and persuasions God's minde should be followed hold it forth who will especially when it is declared by his Ambassadours who in a special manner are authorized by him for that effect We know what a dreadful plague and judgment came upon Iudah 2 Chron. 36 16. 17. because they mocked the messengers of God and despised his words and misused his Prophets the wrath of God arose against his People till there was no remedie And it was this which occasioned the Non-churching of the Church of the Jewes Act. 13 46. Sure when Peoples eare is so uncircumcised that they wil not heare and the Word of the Lord is a reproach unto them and they have no delight in it then is there ground to fear the verification of that sad threatning Ier. 6 11 12. that wrath shall be poured out upon the children abroad and upon the assembly of young men together so that even the husband with the wife shall be taken the aged with him that is full of dayes and their houses shall be turned unto others with their fieldes and wives together for I will streach out my hand upon the inhabitants of the land sayeth the Lord. 6. From what is said it is apparent that all who vvould have peace vvith God and peace in their ovvne consciences and joy in the day
ground sufficient for some actions whereto there is no extraordinary call Answ Though this be sufficiently answered before yet we say 1. That order is already ruined when the Magistrat destroyeth what he should preserve and so crosseth his commission and who teach that in such an extraordinary case when God's order is violated and broken and all in hazard to be overturned such things might be done which needed not to be done if God's order and appoyntment were observed do not take a way to ruine all order but rather to preserve that vvhich order it self is appoynted as a meane to preserve 2. We plead not for such formal imperate acts in matters of Religion as due to privat persones as we have said But for a povver according to the ability God puteth into their hands to hinder him from being dishonoured to defend their ovvne profession and Religion to hinder an universal apostasy and to endeavour in their capacities to have things righted vvhich are out of order And vvhen private persones are carrying themselves thus vve deny that they are runing out of their rank and calling nor can he prove it 3. Will he say that no actions can be sufficiently justified because done in extraordinary necessities and vvithout an extraordinary call Then he shall condemne the Covenants which David made vvith the men of Israel 2 Sam. 5. and vvhich Iehojadah made betwixt the King the People For he told us that both these vvere in extraordinary occasions and he cannot shovv us any extraordinary call He addeth If Magistrates be deficient privat persons are sufficiently discharged if they keep themselves pure and do vvhat possibly they can for advanceing Religion in their privat capacities and by their Elicite acts if a mans eyes be put out his eares or other senses will goe as far to supply that defect as may be yet cannot help the body by elicite acts of seeing So whatever length private persons may goe for the good of the body they must not goe to exercise and exert formally acts magistratical Answ All alongs we heare nothing but dictatings This and this he sayes and there is an end a noble patron of a desperat cause and worthy of a great hire But. 1. The question still abideth undiscussed how far privat persons capacity doth reach for that they must do more then keep themselves pure we have shevved 2. If they may do what possibly they can for advanceing Religion in their capacities they may do more then he will have them doing for then they may defend Religion with the sword and with violence hinder idolatry and superstition and what of that nature provocketh God to wrath All this and more is within their capacity and possibility as he would easily grant if the Magistrate vvould but countenance it yea and though he should oppose say vve But he will say these are not elicite acts And vvill he grant nothing else to privat subjects but elicit acts Then he vvill not grant them liberty to disput for Religion to exhort rebuke and admonish c. for these are not elicite acts more then disputing vvith the svvord and so vvith his Philosophick distinctions he vvould charme us into a perfect acquiescence vvith vvhat Religion the King vvill enjoyne 3. Eares and other senses never set up the eyes and gave them povver to see for their good But the People set up the Magistrates and may do when the Magistrate layeth downe his sword or avowedly betrayeth his trust what they might have done before they made choice of him 4. By this Simile it would follow that the People cannot only not do the Magistrate's Imperat acts but not so much as the Elicite acts which he may do vvhich is false 5. Though they cannot exert or exercise Formally acts Magistratical if they may do it Materially we seek no more In end he tell us That it is a dangerous and destructive tenent to be held forth to be beleeved by People That in all cases whether concerning Religion or Liberty when they account the Magistrate to pervert the government that they are Eatenus in so far even as if they had no King and that the royalty hath recurred to themselves and they may act and exercise it formally as if they had no King at all and this he tels us is the expresse doctrine of Lex Rex Pag. 99. 100. Novv that all may see vvhat a shamelesse and impudent man this is and how little reason any have to give him credite I shall recite the authors very words But because sayeth he the Estates never gave the King power to corrupt Religion and presse a false and I dolatrous worshipe upon them Therefore when the King defendeth not true Religion but presseth upon the People a false and Idolatrous Religion this is some other thing then when they account the Magistrate to pervert c. in that they are not under the King but are presumed to have no King eatenus so farre are presumed to have power in themselves as if they had not appoynted any King at all If an incorporation accused of Treason in danger of the sentence of death shall appoynt a lawyer to advocate their cause if he be stricken with dumbnesse because they have losed their legal and representative tongue none can say that this incorporation hath losed the tongues that nature hath given them so as by natures law they may not plead in their owne just and lawful defence as if they had never appoynted the foresaid lawyer to plead for them The King is made by God and the People King for the Church and People of God's sake that he may defend true Religion for the behove and salvation of all If then he defend not Religion NB in his publick and Royal way It is presumed as undenyable That the People of God who by the law of nature are to care for their owne soull are to defend NB in their way true Religion which so nearly concerneth them and their eternall happinesse Now let any judge if this be so dangerous and destructive a tenent As he would make his reader beleeve But it is easy for him who hath no shame to pervert sentences which he cannot confute and then call them dangerous and destructive and thus he will make the rabble of the degenerate clergy and other simple ones beleeve that he hath confuted Lex Rex And thus dealeth he with Naphtaly as we have shewed already Having thus considered all which the Surveyer hath here and there spoken against that which we have said let us now come to apply what hath been said unto our present purpose of vindicating the late act of defence which by what we have said we finde cannot be justly condemned as treasonable or rebellious but rather approved and commended as loyall service to God and the Countrey For 1. Thereby they were professing their constancy in adhereing to the reformation of Religion in doctrine worshipe Discipline and Government which was
consonant to the word of God and publickly received with all solemnities imaginable notwithstanding of acts and lawes made to the contrary and no true Christian will say That subjects should imbrace any Religion which Magistrates will countenance and prescribe be what it will or upon that account 2. As they were thereby declareing their soul abhorrence of these corruptions which were countenanced and authorized by sinful acts and statutes so they were defending to the utmost of their power the reformed Religion according to their Covenant and vow to God And that such a defence as this is lawful we have shewed 3. They were defending themselves against intolerable and manifestly unjust violence offered because of their adhereing to the cause of God and to the reformed Religion which King Parliament and all rankes of People in the land were solemnely sworne to owne and avow all the dayes of their lives really sincerely and constantly as they should answere to God in the great day no lesse then they 4. They were mindeing their Oath and Covenant made with God with hands lifted up with solemne attestations and protestations the Covenants which they did make and renew in the presence of Almighty God the Searcher of all hearts with a true intention to performe the same 5. They were endeavouring in their places and stations according to the latitude allowed in times of such necessitie and in matters of such weight and moment to have the Church and Kingdome purged of these abhominable and crying corruptions and grievous abhominations which provoke the Lord to wrath against the whole Church and Kingdome 6. They were defending the maine fundamental law and constitution of the Kingdome and that maine article of Agreement and Compact betwixt Soveraigne and Subject which all the members of the Nation were no Lesse bound unto then they 7. They were joyning together as detasteing that detestable indifferency and neutrality abjured to defend and assist one another in the same cause of maintaining their reformed Religion with their best counsel bodyes meanes and whole power against the old inveterate and Common enemie that malignant spirit and rage according to their Covenants 8. They were repenting of their National sin in complying by their sinful silence not giving open faithful and faire testimony when the Truth of God was openly and violently trode under foot with that dreadful course of backslideing which was violently carryed on They were calling for justice and valiently pleading for truth sinfully and tyrannically borne downe and oppressed They were with zeal and courage valiently interposeing labouring to put a stop to the begun and far-carryed-on defection when truth was failing and he who depairted from evil made himself a prey that God might pardon and look in mercy on the land They were endeavouring to stand in the gape and make up the hedge and pleading with their Mother Church or a malignant faction in her shamefully departing from God when there was no other way or meane to be followed or essaved When all these things are duely considered and laid together It will appeare to impartial and unbyassed persones That the late act which is so much condemned and cryed our against is not so hainous and unpardonable a crime as this Surveyer and his wicked party vvould give it out to be but vvas a noble and laudable interprize for the glory of God the good of Religion Church and Kingdome beside that it vvas a most necessary and unavoydable act of self defence Since the Scriptures formerly cited vvill allovv more unto private persons then vvhat this Surveyer restricketh them unto as vve have shevved in a time of defection Then vvhen there vvas no other vvay left to do these dutyes there required and vvhen vvith all several other things did call aloud to a mutual conjunction in armes for defence of one another and repelling of unjust violence and prosecuteing the holy and necessary ends of the Covenants vvhich they svvore no man in reason can suppose that such a vvork is repugnant to Scripture or right reason but rather most consonant to both And though many do and will condemne the same even as to this interprize of Reformation upon what grounds and motives themselves best know yet Our worthy and Noble Reformer famous Mr Knox if he were living this day would be far from speaking after the language of such For he in his appellation Pag. 22. c. hath these words The second is that the punishing of such crimes as are idolatry blasphemy others that touch the Majesty of God doth not Appertaine to the Kings and chief rulers only but also to the whole body of the People and to every member of the same according to the vocation of every man and according to that possibility and occasion which God doth minister to revenge the injury done against his glory when that impiety is manifestly knowne And that doth Moses plainly speak Deut. 13 v. 12 13 14 15 16. in these words if in any of the cities c. plaine it is that Moses speaketh not nor giveth charge to Kings Rulers and judges only but he commandeth the whole body of the People yea and every member of the same according to their possibility And who dar be so impudent as to deny this to be most reasonable and just for seing that God had delivered the whole body from bondage and to the whole multitude had given his law and to the twelve Tribes had he so distributed the inheritance of the land of Canaan that no family could complaine that it was neglected was not the People and every member addebted to acknowledge and confesse the benefites of God Yea had it not been the part of every man to have studyed to have keeped the possession which he had received Which thing God did plainly pronounce they should not do except that in their hearts they did sanctify the Lord God that they embraced and inviolably keeped his Religion established and finally except they did put away iniquity from amongst them declareing themselves earnest Enemies to these abhominations which God declared himself so vehemently to hate that first he commanded the whole inhabitants of that Countrey to be destroyed and all monuments of their idolatry to be broken downe But in such cases Gods will is that all creatures stoup cover their faces and desist from reasoning when commandement is given to execute his judgement Albeit I could adduce diverse causes of such severity yet will I search none other then the holy ghost hath assigned first that all Israel hearing of the judgement should feare to commit the like abhomination and secondly That the Lord might turne from the fury of his anger might be moved towards the People with inward affection be mercyful unto them multiply them according to his oath made unto their Fathers Which reasons as they are sufficient in God's children to correct the murmuring of grudging flesh so ought they to provoke every man as before
by their declarature This is hard if true for then a Parliament might sell them and their posterity for bondmen and bond women to the Turk for ever But we see no more reason for asserting an infallibility or absolutenesse of power in Parliaments then in Princes What furder But to say that all not only obedience but allegiance and fidelity due to any created power is indispensably restricted to this qualification in defence of Religion and liberty viz. of the Subjects is a most false assertion Answ He said not restricted to this qualification but thus qualified and thus restricted This must be either ignorance or worse in this pamphleter thus to wrong the author But vvhat vvas the authors meaning vve have shevved Let us heare The pamphleting Prelate It is knowne sayes he that a restriction excludes all other cases which are not in the restrictive proposition included c. Answ All this is founded upon his either wilfull or ignorant mistake for the author took not the restriction so as we have seen as to exclude all fidelity or obedience except in things tending immediatly and directly unto the good of Religion and Liberty of the Subject But so as that we might do nothing in prejudice of Religion and Liberty nor yeeld obedience to him in any thing tending to the hurt of either thus is our obedience to be restricted or qualified We deny not obedience even when the act of obedience cannot be properly directly said to be either in defence of Religion or the liberty of the subject So that we crosse not what the ministers said unto the doctors of Aberdeen for we take not that clause as exclusive that is that we shall never defend his person and authority but when he is actually actively defending Religion Libertyes but only as a restriction or qualification thus that we shall defend his person authority so far as may consist with Religion Libertyes And thus we agree also with the general assemblie 1639. for we say it is the Subjects duty to concurre with their friends and followers as they shall be required in every cause that concernes his Majesties honour yet so as that they do nothing to the prejudice of Religion or Libertyes But furder sayes he as to the poynt of allegiance or fidelity that is another matter then obedience Answ True when men will become very critical but the scope of the place showeth in what sense he took it not only as includeing an owneing of him as lawful and rightful King c. but as includeing also a promise of active concurrence in defending of him and his interest and so while this is urged in an absolute illimited unqualified or un restricted way he made it all one with obedience It is true a man may keep allegiance or fidelity to the King when he cannot obey his commands yet the clause of the Covenant respects allegiance as well as obedience in so far as we are not to defend his person and authority absolutely but in defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Subjects Allegiance then is a comprehensive thing not only taking in an owneing of the King as rightful King and fidelity to his person crowne and dignity against conspiracyes and treasons but also an active concurring to promove his honour and dignity and to defend his person and authority And so all who say allegiance must be qualified according to this restriction do not meane every thing in allegiance but that which is expressed in the Covenants So that it is his ignorant inference to say That that which Naphtals sayeth is contrary to the confession of saith Cap. 23. § 4. which sayeth is difference in Religion doth not make voyd the Magistrates just and legal authority nor free the people from their due obedience to him unlesse he think the article of the Covenant interfereth with the confession of faith which he dar not assert but if he do assert it let us hear by his next what he will say to the Apologetical Relation Pag. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. where that clause of the Covenant is vindicated He addeth It is the Lord's way for keeping humane societies from grosse disorders to allow to such as are in supreme power by lawful calling the honour due unto their place although in the maine things they pervert the Ends of government dishonouring him by a false Religion or seduceing others to their evil way Answ Do we say that honour is not due unto Magistrates of another Religion because we say that we must promise allegiance and obedience to them in the Lord and must not concure with them nor contribute our power unto them to the manifest detriment of Religion and Libertyes This is like the rest of this Man 's foolish inferences Or doth he think that we cannot give to Caesar the things vvhich are Caesar's unlesse vve give him also the things which are God's and are the Peoples Then he citeth Calv. Instit. Lib. 4. c 20. § 25. 27. But He speaketh nothing contrare to the businesse we are upon Doth he think that Calvin was of the judgment that People are bound to sweare absolute Subjection allegiance or fidelity and obedience to all wicked princes whatever right they may have to the place That subjects are bound to obey and to sweare allegiance in the Lord unto wicked Kings who denyeth do vve say that vvicked Kings because vvicked are eo ipso no Kings nor to be acknowledged as Kings What then doth this testimony make against thus But 2. will he stand to what Calvin sayeth Then he must condemne vvhat King and Parliament have done in taking the life of the Marquise of Argyle and say that they are guilty of innocent blood for by vvhat Calvin here sayeth vve were as much bound to acknovvledge Cromwel then vvhen he did Reigne as now to acknowledge the King for he speaks of all qui quoquo modo rerum potiuntur How will he then free himself from treason For sure in Calvine's judgment Argile did but his duty though he had done more and yet he was condemned as a Traitour can he reconcile this with Calvine's judgment So then our promiseing and swearing alleagiance fidelity and obedience to the King being with a reserve of our alleagiance fidelity and obedience unto the Supreame King of Kings and Lord of Lords and according to that due subordination and thus limited and restricted that we may do nothing against God or in prejudice of his interests no person can with any colour of law or conscience challenge or accuse any of Treason or Rebellion against the King when they preferre the interest of God unto Man's and labour to secure Religion and the interest of Christ unto which they are absolutely and indispensably obliged and from which obligation and alleagiance no authority of man can loose them nothwithstanding that in so doing they postpone the authority of man and their alleagiance thereunto and lay it by seing
it is of no force when it cometh in competition with the authority of God and is stated against that Religion which by divine authority they are bound to maintaine with hazard and losse of their lives goods and fortunes And therefore the late act of defence being according to their sworne alleagiance to God a necessary defence of Religion cannot be condemned of Treason or Rebellion though it wanted that formality of the authority of Subordinat powers As postponing the authority of inferiour Magistrates in act of obedience and duty of alleagiance unto the Superiour can be no proper disloyalty or rebellion so nor can the postponing of the authority of Superiour and inferiour Magistrates in poynt of obedience and performing alleagiance unto the most Supreame be really treasonable seditious or rebellious 2. If we be sworne to maintaine the King's person and authority in the defence of the liberties of the subject Then who ever preferre the Liberties of the Subject unto his person and authority are not Traitours or Rebels And so the late act of defence being for the liberties of the subject when they were basely betrayed sold and given away by a company conjured into a conspiracy against the same and were trode upon and violently plucked away cannot in conscience or in the law of God or according to any just law of man be accounted or condemned as an act of Treason or Rebellion CAP. XII Some moe Arguments Briefly proposed and Prosecuted WE have in the preceeding Chapters proponed and considered such arguments as gave us occasion to meet with what this Surveyer allaidged We shall here ere we come to consider his objections briefly summe up other arguments The worthy author of Lex Rex Quest 28. and 31. hath some which we shall here set downe partly because that book is not in every mans hand and partly because this windy man pretends to have answered much of that book though he hath not so much as offered to make a reply unto the six hundereth part thereof 1. Pag. 261. thus he argueth That power which is obliged to command and rule justly and religiously for the good of the subjects and is only set over the people on these conditions and not absolutely cannot tye the people to subjection without resistence when the power is abused to the destruction of lawes religion and the subjects But all power of the law is thus obliged Rom. 13 ver 4. Deut. 17 ver 18. 19. 23. 2 Chron. 19 ver 6. Psal 132. ver 11. 12. and 89. ver 30. 31. 2 Sam. 7 ver 12. Jer. 17 ver 24 25 And hath been may be abused by Kings to the destruction of Lawes Religion and Subjects The proposition is cleare for the powers that tye us to subjection only are of God 2. Because to resist them is to resist the ordinance of God 3 Because they are not a terrour to good works but to evil 4. Because they are God's ministers for our good But abused powers are not of God but of men are not ordinances of God they are a terrour to good works not to evil they are not God's ministers for our good 2. ibid That power which is contrary to law and is evil and tyrannical can tye none to subjection but is a meer tyrannical power and unlawful and if it tye not to subjection it may lawfully be resisted But the power of a King abused to the destruction of Lawes Religion and subjects is a power contrary to law evil and tyrannical and tyeth no man to subjection wickednesse by no imaginable reason can oblige any man Obligation to suffer of wicked men falleth under no commandement of God except in our Saviour A Passion as such is not formally commanded I meane a physical passion such as is to be killed God hath not said to me in any moral law be thou killed tortured beheaded but only be thou patient if God deliver thee to wicked mens hands to suffer these things 3. Ibid There is not a stricker obligation moral betwixt King and People then betwixt parents and Children Master and Servant Patron and Clyant Husband and Wife The Lord and the Vassal between the pilote of a shop and the passengers the Phisitian and the Sick the doctor and the Schollar But law granteth 1. minime 35. De Relig. sumpt funer If those betray their trust committed to them they may be resisted If the Father turne distracted and arise to kill his Sones his Sones may violently apprehend him bind his hands spoile him of his weapons for in that he is not a father Vasq lib. 1. illustr quaest Cap. 8. n. 18. Si dominus subditum enormiter atrociter oneraret princeps superior vasallum posset ex toto eximere a sua jurisdictione etiam tacente subdito nihil petente Quid papa in suis decis parliam grat decis 32. Si quis Baro. abutentes dominio privari possunt The Servant may resist the Master if he attempt unjustly to kill him So may the wife do to the Husband If the pilot should wilfully run the ship on a roke to destroy himself and his passengers they might violently thrust him from the helme Every Tyrants is a furious Man and is morally distracted as althus sayeth polit cap. 28. n. 30. seqq 4. Pag. 262. That which is given as a blessing and a favour and a scrine betwixt the Peoples Liberty and their bondage cannot be given of God as a bondage and slavery to the People But the Power of a King is given as a blessing favour of God to defend the poor needy to preserve both tables of the law and to keep the People in their libertyes from oppressing and treading on upon another But so it is that if such a power be given of God to a King by which actu primo he is invested of God to do acts of Tyranny and so to do them that to resist him in the most innocent way which is self defence must be resisting of God and rebellion against the King his deputy Then hath God given a royal power as incontrollable by mortal men by any violence as if God himself were immediatly and personally resisted when the King is resisted and so this power shall be a power to waste and destroy irresistably and so in it self a plague and curse for it cannot be ordained both according to the intention and genuine formal effect and intrinsecal operation of the power to preserve the tables of the Law Religion and Liberty Subject and lawes and also to destroy the same But it is taught by Royalists That this power is for Tyranny as wel as for peacable government because to resist this royal power put forth in acts either of Tyranny or just government is to resist the ordinance of God as Royalists say from Rom. 13 1 2 3. We know to resist God's Ordinance and Gods deputy formaliter as his deputy is to resist God himself 2 Sam. 8. ver
defence 3. The power given to Magistrates can not loose the obligation of people unto God's moral law but by the moral law they are bound in this case of imminent danger to defend themselves their Wives and Children and their Religion these are acts of charity which Magistrates cannot loose them from otherwise Magistrates might command us to kill the innocent the widow and the fatherlesse and we might lawfully do it at their command which is most false and absurde therefore neither can their expresse prohibition hinder us from relieving such whom we are bound to relieve nor exeem us from the guilt of Murther before God if we do it not but obey their prohibition The connexion of the proposition I cleare thus 1. The law of self defence is no lesse valide in the one case then in the other 2. The law of charity obligeth in the one case no lesse then in the other 3. Magistrates are no more appoynted of God to destroy the people themselves then to suffer others to destroy them and so the resisting of their violence in the one case is no more a resisting of the ordinance of God then the resisting or counter-acting of their prohibition or silence in the other case 4. Magistrates are no lesse to be accounted in so far no Magistrates when they counter-act their commission then when they sinfully betray their trust and neglect their commission 5. Unjust violence offered in Lives Liberties and Religion is no lesse unjust violence when offered by Magistrats themselves then when offered by strangers Magistrates permitting or conniveing 10. If it be lawful for private Subjects to joyne together in armes and defend Themselves their Lands Liberties Wives Children Goods and Religion against a forraigne Enemie invading the land to conquer and subdue the same with the Magistrates approbation or expresse warrand Then it is also lawful to resist domestick Enemies animated by the same power and authority But the former is true because Magistrates in that case do professe and avow themselves tyrants seeking the destruction of the whole Realme and therefore are not Magistrates Therefore c. The consequence is cleared abundantly in the preceeding argument and cannot be denyed for a domestick enemy is more unnatural unjust ihhumane illegal hurtful and dangerous then a forraigne enemy 11. Such acts of unjust violence which neither Magistrates themselves may immediatly commit nor may any subject under them without sin and disobedience to God execute may lawfully be resisted by private persones when committed in a rage or cruelly executed by inseriours But such are acts of oppressing plundering spoyling Subjects of their libertyes because of their adhereing to their sworne Covenanted Religion Therefore c. That Princes and Magistrates may not oppresse and wronge the People is clear 1 Sam. 12 3 4 5. 2 Sam. 23 3. 1 King Cap. 21. and 22. 2 Chron. 9 8. Psal 105 14 15. Esa 1 23. and 3 12 13 14 15. and 14 15 to 23. and 9 7. and 16 5. and 32 1 2. and 49 23. Ier. 22 3 to 32. Zeph. 2 8. and 3 3. Micah 3 1. to 12. Obad. v. 2 10 to 17. Ezech. 22 6 7 27. and 45 8 9. It is contrare to their expresse commission Rom. 13 4 5. That their unjust mandats for oppression and useing of violence are not to be obeyed is no lesse clear from Exod. 1 15 16 17 18 19 20. 1 Sam. 22 17 18. Psal 52 5. So likewise it cannot but be cleare That it must also be lawful to resist that violence when wickedly and unjustly acted and executed For what power Magistrates can not themselves put into execution is not of God nor ordained of God and therefore the resisting of that cannot be the resisting of any power ordained of God And againe what power subjects cannot lawfully put into execution can be no lawful Magistratical power appoynted of God For if it were a refuseing to put the same into execution were a real resisting of the ordinance of God And so a resisting of this when wickedly put into execution is no resisting of the ordinance of God which causeth damnation 12. That it is just and lawful to flee from the violence of Magistrates will not be denyed But if that be lawful when subjects have no power or meanes whereby to resist or oppose unjust violence with violence It cannot be simply unlawful to resist the same unjust violence with force vvhen neither flying nor hideing nor other such like meanes of saifty are practicable Because it is the principle of self defence against violence that makes flight lavvful vvhen there is no possibility of resistence and the same principle of self defence will make resistance lawful when the other is not practicable Againe the principle of charity to their Wives and Children and other Relations makes flight lawful when they can not otherwise avoide the unjust violence of Tyrants and the same principle will animate to resistence when practicable when they cannot flee with wives and children and old decrepite parents c. Thirdly the same principle of conscience viz that they may keep their Religion and Conscience free and undefiled which will prompt to a flight when there is no other remedy will prompt also to resistence when flight is not practicable I remember The Surveyer Pag. 41. calleth this a monster of a stoical paradex which the paire of pseuâ—o martyres brought forth whereas flight is only a withdrawing from under his dominion and putting ones self under another dominion where his power reaches not and so by flight and withdrawing from the Kingdomes the man ceaseth to be a subject to him whose subject he was and comes to be under other Lords and lawes Answ This must be a monster of men whose eyes must be of a magnifying glasse of a paradoxical quality and he must have a strange stoical phancy who imagineth that such a thing is a paradex and a stöical paradox and a monster of a stöical paradox what could his stoical braine have said more paradoxically Flight and non-obedience both are a resisting of the abused power and if the cause be just which is pressed by the Magistrate flight on that account non-obedience is a resistence of the powers ordained of God condemned Rom. 13. for such an one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is out of due order But. 2. As we have seen the consequence will hold and we seek no more we need not make it a resistence equal with forcible resistence 3. He speaketh of a flight out of the King's dominions but what sayes he to a flight when the persones flying keep still within the dominions Will he grant that this is liker unto a resistence And he must if his reasons hold for in this case the man ceaseth not to be a subject nor cometh he to be under another Lord and if he grant this our argument will stand as firme as ever 4. The man for all the money he hath gotten from his
open justice deposed him and condemned him for tyranny adjudging him to have his head fastned to a forke so to be publickely whipped to death and then precipitated from a rock but he escaped killed himself as historians say and in this fact they are approved by learned politicians and lawyers See Bod in de Repub. lib. 2 c. 5. So that either he must say that Nero was not the higher power who might not be resisted but that the Senate was above him or that such as justify the Senate are in an errour and so he must condemne them for what they did without any colour of reason 4 This text will no more plead against resisting of Superious powers then against resisting of inferiour Magistrates For the text speaks of all in any supereminency It speaketh of powers in the plural number see the dutch annot on the place Peter mentioneth inferiours as well as the Supreame Now will the Surveyer say that in no case it is lawful to resist even by force the inferiour Magistrates will he say that we may not oppose them when abuseing their power And if he grant that in some cases inferiour Magistrates may be resisted he must also grant that this text doth not forbid or condemne all resistence to he higher power but only a resisting of legal and lavvful commands whether by disobedience or by armes 5. Though we cannot say that the Apostle is speaking here always of the ordinance of Magistracy in the abstract so as altogether to exclude the persons invested there with yet we think it hardly saife to say that there is nothing here to be understood of the abstract office as when he speaketh of the original and rise of the office and of the end and proper native effect thereof it is more proper to understand that of the office in abstracto then of the Supposita so invested Next whatever is required here as due to the Supposita it is upon the account of the office with which they are invested and in so far aud no furder And therefore though the office and ordinance cannot be resisted yet the person who is there vvith invested may be resisted not as he is invested but as he abuseth the povver and so devesteth himself for as he abuseth the power he cannot be looked on as invested there vvith in so far especially if he abuse it in the maine and principal ends for vvhich it vvas appoynted for then he is de jure and upon the matter utterly devested thereof Furder whatever subjection is due to the person it is upon the account of the office which he beareth and no more subjection is due to him upon that account then is due unto the office it self or to the civil legal authority which is imported by the abstract word if so much seing a quo quidquam est tale id ipsum est magis tale Therefore the subjection vvhich is not due to the office cannot be due to him Novv subjection is due to the office as it is the office And an abused office is not the office Ergo that subjection is not required to the abused office which is due to the office Ergo nor is it due to him vvho abuseth the office The office vvill not vvarrand a subjection to that vvhich is not the office and an abused office is not the office 6. The submission or subjection here required is not unto Tyranny or Tyrants vvho abuse their povver unto the destruction of the Commonvvealth and to the ruine of the Subjects as such For such are not the ordinance of God nor ordained under God but opposite to God unto which alone the subjection here spoken of is due Gerhard de magist polit n. 54. Tels us that the apostle doth acurately distinguish betvvixt the povver and the abuse of the povver and sayes the povver itself and not the abuse of the povver is of God and also that he distinguisheth betvvixt the office it self the person in office the person oft by fraud violence falshood and other evil meanes by cruelty tyranny both assumeth the place exerceth the office in this respect is not of God Hos 8 4. 2. The resisting of Tyrants cannot procure damnation unto the resisters because they have violated no command 3. Such are not a terrour to evil works therefore submission is not due unto them as such 4. Such will not give praise to such as do vvell but that is the power vvhich is not to be resisted of vvhich vve are to be afrayed and of which vve shall have praise vvhile vve do that vvhich is good 5. He is not to be resisted vvho is the Minister of God for good But Tyrants Neroes who vvished that all the Romans had but one Neck that he might cut them all off at one blow are not ministers of God in so far but ministers of Satan 6. Such are not the revenger vvho beareth the sword to execute wrath upon him that doth evil but rather imployeth the svvord to destroy such as do vvell to subvert Lawes Religion and all that is good Therefore it is not of such as such that the text speaketh when it sayes we must yeeld Submission 7. As it is not upon the account of their playing the tyrant aud overturning Religion Liberties Subjects that tribute is to be payed to them so nor is subjection to be yeelded unto them in all poynts but as they are God's Ministers attending continually upon this very thing to suppresse wickednesse promove godlinesse 8. Nor is it upon any other account that fear honour and custome is to be given unto them And so the text considers these povvers to vvhom subjeciton is due not as Tyrants or as abuseing their power to the ruine and destruction of all but as carrying themselves as the Ministers of God for the ends appoynted aud not as the Ministers and ordinance of Satan Therefore not vvithstanding of any thing in this Text such may be resisted or rather their Tyranny may be resisted which is not nor never vvas ordained of God and vvhich is diretly opposite unto and no part of that povver ordained of God And though Nero and some others vvere real Tyrants yet neither doth the text name him nor doth it presse subjection to tyranny in any for lesse to his Tyranny but only subjection to the powers that are of God ordained of him of which there might have been some vvho were not Tyrants even when Nero was playing the Tyrant And it is as rational to understand the text of those as of Nero or such like However vve finde subjection is pressed to the povver vvhich is ordained of God and that is not the power as it is abused From all which it is cleare that it is not the supposita but supposita as such which are not to be resisted or such as carry in a due subordination unto God seing all the Apostles arguments presse only subjection unto such and
c. That is naked as they were they might have removed themselves to some other part of the world and they would not Yea Tertullian did condemne flight in time of persecution in his Book De fugâ in persecutione But will any condemne this practice now or think it unlawful or unbeseeming Christians to flee from the fury of enraged persecuters Sure this Surveyer doth often grant it to be lawful It seemeth then that either he hath catched some errour in his head that is not Christian as he speaks of us Pag. 39. or all which the primitive Christians maintained in opinion and practice was not so Christian as to be perpetually obligeing 4. The primitive Christians ran to martydome when neither cited nor accused as is seen in Fox his Acts and Monum Vol. 1. Will any say that Every Christian is bound and obliged to do so now How then shall their meer example be obligeing in the other practice 5. The primitive Christians would not bow their knees upon the Sabbath Dayes nor eat blood Must that example of theirs perpetually oblige us now 6. Yea it was the opinion of Ambrose Libr. 5. Orat. in Auxentiâ—â— that no armes should be used by him against the Goths who then invaded Italy to waste and destroy the same but teares will it hence follow That a Church-man may defend himself against open invading enemies no other way now but by teares because he said Aliter nec debeo nec possum resisâ—ere 4. The Anabaptists make use of this example of the primitive Christians to disprove the lawfulnesse of warr as may 〈◊〉 seen in Gerhard upon that head and would this Surveyer have us yet more Anabaptists then he wickedly and falsly alledgeth we are in his bitter preface It seemes he would joyne hands vvith the Anabaptists as to this and upon that accountvve have as good ground to call him an Anabaptist as he hath to call us Iam sumus ergo pares 5. He cannot shevv us that these Fathers did account it unlavvful simply in poynt of conscience to resist Emperours vvickedly persecuting They hold forth no scriptural ground condemning the same but rather seeme to say that it was out of a desire of Martyrdome which as Sulpitius Sever us sayeth they sought for more earnestly then in his dayes men gaped for Bishopricks therefore they willingly yeelded up their lives and all to the cruel rage of persecuters that they might obtaine the crowne of Martyrdome It is true Tertullian sayes Apud istam disciplinam magis occidi licet quam occidere But this sayes not that it is simply sinful t kill in self-defence but that they choosed rather to be killed or martyred 6 Though we shall not goe about to call in question the truth of Tercullian's narration concerning the number power of Christians in his time and yet Mr Goodwin in his Anticaâ—valierisme makeyth it very probable that he vvas mistaken in his computation if he did meane it through the vvhole Empirre Or that if it vvas so it vvas not knovvn to the Christians and so it vvas all one as to resisting upon that ground Yet vve may say That there might have been many things vvhich in prudence might have made them to forbeare to goe to an open vvar or rise in armes against the Emperours even this that the Emperours alvvayes had a greart militia many and strong armies on foot against vvhich for naked persons though many scattered up and dovvne the Empire having fevv or none to command or lead them forth to battel in their defence to rise in this case had been no probable meane of saifty to themselves or of defence but rather a meane to provoke the Tyrant more and procure unto themselves more suddaine deathe and destruction So that not withstanding of their number their capacity to effectuat such an interprise vvas but small and very improbable 7. The ancient Christians vvere not so utterly ignorant nor so void of humanity and Christian love and Zeal that being able to help they vvould suffer their brethren to be dravvne to death what ever this Surveyer sayeth but some times they rescued the oppressed out of the hands of the oppressours For vve read that about the yeer 235. certane men inhabiteing Maâ—ëota vvith force resued Dionâ—sius of Alexandria out of the hands of such as were carrying him away So about the year 342. the good People of Alexandria did vvith force defend Athanasius About the yeer 387. the People of Caesaria did defend Basil See Nazianz Orat. 20. And also the People of Samosata purposed to retaine their Bishop Eusebius Pius banished at the command of Valens the Emperour had not Eusebius himself restrained them And about the year 356. the People of Constantinople did in like manner stand to the defence of Paulus see for this Blondel's Scholia in Grot. de Imp Sum. Pot. Pag. 65. 8. Before Constantin's dayes none of the Emperours owned or professed the Christian faith so that religion was not then established by lawes as our Religion is and therefore all that Tertullian or Cyprian say cometh not home to our case Yea Tertullian sayeth they were but a number of strangers exteri sumus sayes he vestra omnâ—o implevimus 9. Though it is true that when Conflantine obtained the Empire Christian Religion was more secured and established then formerly yet did not the succeeding Emperours when they came to the throne sweare to maintaine the same and all who owned it they did not receive the imperial crowne on these tearmes nor were the subjects bound unto them on these conditions and so the instances adduced after Constantin's dayes sute not our case wherein Religion is become not only a legal right of the People but a fundamental right and the maine clause and condition of the compact betwixt Magistrate and Subject as hath been said 10. As for the Christians not resisting the Arrian Emperours it speaks nothing For that controversy was long under debate even in Constantin's dayes and decreased nothing for all the sentence of the Nicene Councel which passed against it and hereby Bishop was against Bishop Province against Province Council against Council and at length all the world almost was turned Arrian What wonder then that there was no general opposition made against these Arrian Emperours when their Subjects imbraced the same delusion And as for particular oppositions we shall see some instances afterward 11. As for the Theban Legion their non-resistence speaks nothing to our case for then Religion was not setled by law 2. For six thousand six hundered sixty six men to interpise a warre against the Emperour and al his army had neither been an act of prudence nor policy 3. When he tells us that they offered themselves willingly to be butchered holding up their naked bodyes to the Emperour 's bloody emissaryes we see what he would have all the honest People of Scotland doing this day even going with ropes about their necks and with open brests to
impious and opposite to the solemne Covenants under which the Land standeth bound and obliged before the Lord conspire with them in this Apostasy against the interest of God in the Land From all which we think these things will clearly follow 1. That it may be much doubted if this last convention can be accounted by any law either of God or Man a lawful Parliament having so palpably betrayed their trust in ruleing not for God and his interest but against him end enacting things to his dishonour in selling and giving away the old and undoubted Privileges of Parliament and in betraying dilapidating disponeing and giving away the native and unquestionable Rights and Privileges of the People and in overturning the fundamental lawes of the Land and annulling the fundamental article of the compact betwixt King and People Seing Politicians will grant that such are to be accounted but private persones though we should make no mention of other informalities which usually weaken or annul the constitution of a judicature of that nature in poynt of formality as liberty denyed to some shires to choose such members as they thought good prelimitation used to all the admission of some as members not capable of an election according to our ancient and received custome the denying of free liberty of debateing reasoning dissenting and protesting which is allowed in all free Judicatories and the carrying on of matters in a head-strong violent and tyrannical manner without such previous deliberation or serious consideration and pondering the weight and moment of matters as would have become a judicature by its constitution and nature so sage and honorable 2. The native ancient and undoubted Privileges of the People are de Iure intire and inviolated notwithstanding of any thing done by this late meeting which had no power to do what they did And therefore could not wronge the rights and Privileges of the People 3. That there is no hope or humaine probability now left that ever the People of Scotland shall have a Parliament by the course laid downe or inferiour Judges to resent the injuries oppression and Tyranny done to and exercised upon them but that still their bands shall be made stronger and the yoke of oppression and Tyranny wreathed closser about their neckes So that there was not neither is there any hope so long as this course of defection standeth and is not overturned that Parliaments now or the Primores Regni or inferiour Judges shall concurre for the suppressing of Tyranny bearing downe of oppression defection and apostasy according as they ought 4. That while matters are so the People of Scotland are as if they had no Parliaments nor inferiour Judges for that end and cannot be supposed or imagined to be in a worse condition then if they never had had my such to protect them from the tyrannical and arbitrary lust and domination of Princes And therefore must be allowed to use the privilege and liberty which nature hath granted unto them to defend themselves from unjust tyranny and oppression of Princes Parliaments and inferiour Judicatories when their Representatives palpably betray them into the hands of their adversaries yea and conspire with their adversaries against them and their Privileges and instead of Patrons and defenders of their rights and privileges turne enemies thereunto and take courses utterly to destroy all By this I suppose the first Objection is sufficiently answered yet I shall adde this word more and would desire that all who are of a contrary judgement would answere this quaeree Whether or not vvould they think it unlavvful for private persons vvithout a Parliament privy Council or other inferiour Magistrates to resist a Prince or his Emissaries if he vvith the consent of these should transferre unto him self the proper and immediat right unto all the Lands Rentes Tenements possessions Heretages and goods within the vvhole Land vvith full povver to sell dispone and give avvay the same unto whom he pleased and presently upon the passing of that act cause eject dispossesse and remove all the present heretours and possessours or put them to buy it of nevv of him or take tackes thereof as taksmen fermers or tennents If they think that in this case they might lawfully resist such horrid tyranny Then why not in our case when the People contrary to all law oathes and vowes are put out of the possession of their Covenanted Religion reformed in doctrine worshipe discipline government that by meer violence and tyranny Sure such matters as touch Soul and consciences ought to be as deare to People as what concerneth their bodyes and estates Or if we should put the case That the King were about to sell the whole Land unto the Turk or unto Irish bloody Papists by bribes or promises should procure the consent of a Parliament the concurrence of Council and other judicatories as really upon the matter walking according to the acts they have made he may Might it be unlawfull for People in this case without the concurrence of inferiour Magistrates who had now sold them and basely betrayed their trust to stand to their owne defence and to the defence of their posterity and their lives rights liberties and privileges And if this cannot be asserted by any man who hath not made a perfect surrender of his owne reason unto the will and lust of another why can resistence in our case be condemned Seing soul matters are of infinite more worth then these outward things And it were lesse bitter to know and see our posterity redacted into a state of perfect slavery unto forraigners as to their outward privileges them to see them shut up into a closse prison of soul slavery and bondage destitute of the pure and lively ordinances of salvation and frustrated of the glorious and excellent liberties and effects of a purely preached gospell and so shut up in a dungeon of ignorance superstition and all Prophanity that they should never know what true liberty meaneth As for the next objection taken from this that they were not the Whole Body of the land but only a part thereof which cannot be so well justified It may easily be answered That it being lawful for a single persone in some cases to defend himself from unjust violence It will be much more lawful for a considerable part of a Kingdome to defend themselves though they get not help of others Though all be bound to help a ravished maide yet though none should help she may resist and defend herself But to leave this because we have adduced many arguments that concludes the case lawful even for a part of the Kingdome we shall speak to the complex case not only as it was a defence but also a probable meane to put a stop unto the course of defection Which was and is carryed on and to redeem the land from spiritual bondage and slavery as well as bodily And to this we say That when the case is a publick case
concerning all the land no lesse then these who jeoparded their lives for the same no man in reason can condemne these few that undertooke the interprise the profitable effects of which would have redounded to the whole When a city is on fire no man will think the few that hazard their lives to quench the same are to be blamed though the rest doe lye by and will not concurre The men of Ephraim Benjamin and Issacher who followed Deborah and jeoparded their lives upon the high places of the field that they might deliver the whole land from under the Tyrranny of Iabes King of Canaan though Reuben God and Zebulon did not concurre according to their duty were not the more to be blamed but are the more praised and commended and such as came not put to the help of the Lord against the mighty were under a bitter curse The common tye of Christianity and brotherhood and other supervenient obligations did oblige all the Land as was shewed above to concurre as one man to endeavour the deliverance of he Land from dreadful oppression and tyranny and because the greatest part like Issacher in an other case loved to couch under the burden and refused to contribut their help for their owne delivery and proved enemies shall these few who ventured their lives and Estates and all which they had for the liberation of the land be the more upon that account condemned What hight of absurdity were this Had the Men of Ephraim good reason to challenge Iephthah Iudg. 12 ver 1 2. c. because he fought with the Midianites without them when he sayes that he had called them and they would not come out If an Enemy invade the land and such provinces as are furthest from danger shall neglect or refuse to concure with the rest to expell them yea shall strengthen the invadeing enemy shall these be blamed who are next to the danger to take the alarme at the first and do what in them lyeth for their owne saifty and the saifty of the whole land Therefore seing the cause which these few owned was of common concernment and equally respecting the whole land since the rest would not concurre as they were bound to do they are more praise-worthy then blame-worthy that ventured all for the good of the whole land and did what in them lay to redeem the whole land from that oppression and bondage under which it was lying If it had been some small petty particulare of their owne it had been more lyable to the censures of men but the cause being Common which they did owne a Covenant sworne by all ranks of People and a Covenanted work of reformation and liberty from tyranny both in Church and State was a cause not peculiar unto them but common to all the land it is the hight of absurdity illegality yea and inhumanity to accuse them of Treason of sedition or to condemne their interprise upon that account So that though the major part of the land turne so corrupt as to imbrace a corrupt abjured course see their privileges taken from them the vvork of God overthrovvne lavves ratifying and approving Religion reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government and secureing people in their peacable and Christian possession of these novv abolished rescinded and annulled their libertyes as civil scotish men and as Christians sold avvay their fundamental compact and the cardinall clause of that contract betvvixt King and Subject cancelled and shamefully brocken Tyranny and oppression of consciences bodyes and Estates established and no legal remedy or redresse apparent or probable and shall notwithstanding of all this love to sit still not to be stirr themselves according to their places power for secureing Religion lawes libertyes For extirpating abjured prelacy and malignancy and restoreing the Ordinances of Christ to their wonted purity delivering the land from slavery bondage from stupenduous apostasy defection at which the Heavens may stand astonished and all men and angels may wonder Shall their negligence and deficiency in duty binde up the hands of the wel affected and render them utterly incapable in law to minde themselves and the good of the whole land the good whereof they are obliged by many bonds and obligations to seek by all farie meanes possible Neither doth the lawes of Nature the lawes of God nor particularly the bond of Christian love to their Native land to their Mother Church and to their Christian oppressed brethren nor the bond of their Covenants solemne vowes and engadgments so limite this duty and loose them from all endeavour after a performance But by the contrare if God give any probable capacity upon all these considerations they are the more obliged to lay out themselves to the utmost and to account themselves the more indispnesably obliged thereunto that as the hazard is greater the losse is the more certane and irrecoverable Wherefore seing the ground and ends of the riseing of these few was not particular but general and national the good and benefite of the interprise redounding unto all no lesse then to themselves and being that whereunto all no lesse then they were obliged by solemne vowes and moral bonds their case must be otherwise considered then the case of a few malcontented persons who because of some particular injuries done to themselves and for some particular ends proper and peculiar to themselves alone arise in rebellion against the lawful Magistrate The Royalists themselves allow it lawful for any privat person to kill an usurper or a Tyrant sine titulo and why But because the good of this action doth redound not to himself alone But to the whole Land So in some places a reward is promised to all such as shall kill a Bear or any such noysome beast because the good and frute of this action concerneth moe then themselves and therefore though all were bound to do what they did yet they are not blamed but rewarded for what they have done So should these rather have been revvarded then blamed or condemned for vvhat they did interprise for the universal and national good of the vvhole Land As for the third Objection so much hath been spoken of that already whether we mean the particular sufferings and oppressions of the People of Galloway The Naphtaly is full to this purpose or the general calamity by reason of apostasy defection perjury oppression in Religion and libertyes which is so noture that none who hath not renunced common sense together with Religion honesty can deny it or pretend ignorance thereof that we need do no more here but give a short reply to what the Surv. hath said to this matter only we would adde this That if That learned lawyer Althusius in his politikes Cap. 38. n. 5. c. give the right characters of a Tyrant and of Tyranny we may have good ground to say that our land beareth many blae marks of that tyranny for sayeth he there is
one kinde of Tyranny which consisteth in violating changeing or removing of fundamental lawes specially such as concerne Religion such sayes he was Athalia Philip the King of Spaine who contrare to the fundamental Belgick lawes did erect an administration of justice by force of armes and such was Charles the IX of France that thought to overturne the Salicque law and whether our King be not in this guilty in overturning the fundamental lawes concerning our reformed Religion let the world judge Next sayes he when he keepeth not his faith and promise but despiseth his very oath made unto the people and who is more guilty of this then King Charles the 2 â— n. 9. He giveth us this mark when the supreme Magistrate marketh use of an absolute power and so breaketh all bands for the good of humane society and are not the bonds both of piety and justice novv violated n. 11. He tels us a Tyrant doth take away from one or moe member of the Commonwealth free exercise of the orthodox Religion and n. 12. that for corrupting of youth he erecteth stage-playes whore houses and other play-houses and suffers the colleges and other seminaries of learning to be corrupted and n. 15. that living in luxury whoredome greed and idlenesse he neglecteth or is unfit for his office How these sute our times we need not expresse Then n. 16. He sayes he is a Tyrant who doth not desend his Subjects from injuries when he may but suffereth them to be oppressed and what if he oppresse them himself n. 19. who sayes he by immoder at exactions and the like exhausts the subjects Jer. 22 ver 13. 14. Ezech. 34. 1 King 12 19. Psal 14 4. and n. 10 who hindereth the free suffrages of Members of Parliament so that they dare not speak what they would how much of this we finde to be true in needlesse here to expresse Then n. 23 24 c. he tels us he is a Tyrant who takes away from the people all power to resist his tyranny as armes strengthes and chief men whom therefore though innocent he hateth afficteth and persecuteth exhausts their gods and lively-hoods without right or reason all which he confirmeth by several Scriptures And how apposite these are to our present case all know who is not an utter stranger to our matters So that when we have so many things to alledge none can justly blame us for saying that vve are oppressed and borne dovvne vvith insupportable tyranny and now we goe on to consider what he sayes And as to the first he tells us Pag. 68. That their life and blood was not sought upon any tearmes there was no forceing them to idolatry nor false worshipe nor frighting them to any thing of that kinde upon paine of their lives only for contempt of the outward ordinances of God purely administred in an orthodox Church they were put to pay such moderate fines as the publick lawes had appoynted Without any actual invasion of them or their persones They were the first aggressors murthering the Kings Servants and seiseing on his chief officer They had never before that assayed supplicating which was not forbidden them to do if so be they would have done it without tumults and combinations but flew to the sword and marched on to mock authority with armed petitions as they mocked God by sinful prayers to prosper their evil course Answ 1. What intention there was to seek the life and blood of these People God koweth But sure all who knew their case saw that their life was only left them that they might feel their misery So were they oppressed and harassed that death would have been chosen rather then life Were they not beaten wounded and bound as beasts their goods and substance devoured before their eyes were not their lands and tenements laid waste and many redacted to beggary Besides other inhumane barbarityes which they were made to suffer 2. We see he would allow it lawful to resist if the King should force to idolatry and false worship and what will he do then with his arguments which will not allow that exception as they are urged by him He must necessarily grant that they are inconcludent that it holdeth here Argumentum nihâ—l probat quod nimium probat 3. How beit they were not forced to idolatry yet by the same law reason and equity or rather Tyranny and inquity they might have been forced to that as to what they were forced That is by the law of Tyranny and violent oppression They were pressed to owne and countenance perjured prophane wicked and debauched Curates thrust in upon them contrare to their Privileges as lawful and duely called Ministers and thereby to owne and approve of Prelacy which was abjured and cast out of the Church with detestation and so to concurre in their places and stations with and give their testimony unto a most wicked and unparallelable course of defection and Apostacy from God and his holy wayes and works and thereby to condemne the Reformation of Religion in doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government which God had vvonderfully vvrought amongst us and vvhich all ranks of People vvere solemnely svvorne to maintaine and defend 4. He talketh of the outvvard ordinances of God purely administred vvhen all knovv how these profane vvretches made all vvho ever knevv vvhat the service of the true and living God vvas to abhore the offering of the Lord For they despised the Name of the Lord and offered polluted bread upon his altar and made the table of the Lord contemptible they offered the blinde the lame and the sick and torne and thus they vovved sacrificed unto the Lord a corrupt thing Yea their administration of ordinances vvas and is to this day rather like histrionick acts and scenes then the service of the true and living God And vvhat sober serious Christian yea vvhat soul that hath any beleeving apprehensions of the Majesty of God can be vvitnesse let be a concurring actor in and consenter unto such abhomination and idol-like Worshipe 5. He talkes of an orthodox Church vvherein perjury and such like abhominations are approved and countenanced maintained and avovved and vvherein the vvork of Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government is condemned a Covenant abjureing Popery Prelacy Prophanesse Schisme and Heresy and whatsoever is contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godlinesse condemned and annulled and wherein Atheisme wickednesse ignorance licentiousnesse and all sort of prophanity yea and blasphemy aboundeth and wherein there is so much Popery and idolatry countenanced and connived at and such abhominations reigneing Our first confession of faith recorded in Parliament Cap. 18. giveth this as one note of a true Church viz. That in it Ecclesiasticall Discipline be uprightly ministred as God's Word prescribeth whereby vice is repressed vertue nourished But now there is a discipline repugnant to Gods Word administred whereby vice is nourished virtue suppressed 6. He sayes that
the fines were moderate But more immoderate fines and exorbitant penaltyes vvere never imposed by Rulers except such whose designe was to Tyrannize over the soules and consciences of poor people and to the payment of these transcendently exorbitant penaltyes they were constrained not in a legal manner as it ought to be in a civil and free republick but in a military compulsive constraineing way whereby their persones and goods were tyrannically and inhumanely invaded plundered destroyed and ruined 7. It is true providence so ordered it that the first that was vvounded was one of the souldiers But Naphtali tels him that the countrey men were necessitated thereto in their ovvne defence for vvhen they but desired the souldiers to loose the poor man vvhom they had bound hand and foot like a beast they vvere assaulted vvith drawne swords and so first and last they vvere invaded and provocked were not the first aggressours beside that was but a meer accidental emergent though they had formally without that occurrent provocation joyned together to have repelled unjust violence none in reason could have called them the first aggressours being so long before that time at two inrodes beside this last so barbarously and inhumanely used by Sr Iames Turner that bloody executioner of illegal tyranny and brutish beastly Doeëg who having renunced all humanity compassion raged like a wilde beare to the laying waste of that countrey side So that here was no violent re-offending used without a previous actual invasion made by companyes of armed men sent to eat up root out and destroy a worthy and precious countrey-side An imminent danger sayes the law is a sufficient ground to take up armes and that is not previous strokes but the terrour of armour or threatning L. sed si ff ad Leg. Aquil. l. 3. quod qui armati ff de vi vi armâta Sure here was enough to warrand a Community to stand to their defence and to prevente their utter ruine and destruction which was certanely expected and this was to them the last and most inexorable case of necessity And so the places which he citeth out of Lex Rex do partly confirme this and partly are not to the purpose being spoken of a single person buffeting his master after he hath been buffeted or having received deaths wounds seeketh to revenge himself on his aggressor 8. He tels us they should have first supplicated these in power But they had supplicated already Sr Iames Turner and their case was made worse and not the better thereby and all joynt petitioning was condemned as treasonable and what could they then have done The most peacable manner of supplicating if it had been in a joynt manner that could have been devised had been interpreted tumultuous And Since it was so what could they do but after the example of our progenitors advance with armes in the one hand and a petition in the other 9. The Prophane man talks of their mocking God by their prayers and of their spoyling loyal persons but as they have the testimony of all among whom they were that they were not to be charged with plundering taking nothing unlesse it were a few horses and such things as were necessary for the defence of their lives and for the welfare of the Countrey wherein many do suppose they were but too too spareing seing the benefite was common to all and they were to venture their lives not for themselves alone but for the whole Countrey So the Lord gave proof that he hath accepted their endeavours though it was not his appoynted time to restore our Kingdome in that he did so signally ovvne and countenance such as vvere honoured vvith martyrdome for the Testimony of Iesus and for his interest and cause But this man speakes like himself vvhen he addeth that both they and others have cause to blesse God that they had no successe which might have been a snare and stumbling block to them and others also For vve knovv indeed that it is no small mercy not to thrive in an evil vvay and therefore vve think that He and his vvicked fraternity on whom the Lord is raineing snares by suffereing them to thrive have great cause to lament the blak day that is coming and to tremble both for the imminent judgments and for the dreadful plague and judgement of hardnesse of heart vvith vvhich they are already visited of the righteous God Yet vve knovv That a vvay may be his vvay vvhich he vvill not prosper for a time till the cup of the Amorites be full and he hath attained his other holy ends vvhich he designeth in casting his Church into a furnance And if he judge of causes alvvayes by the event he shevveth himself a stranger to the Soveraigne vvay of the Lord in all ages As to other thing he speaketh Pag. 10. and sayeth doth not the true protestant Religion as it is held forth inscripture and was publickly confessed by our first reformers which confession is Registred Parl. 1. K. James 6. through God's mercy continue with us without variation from it in the least Doth not the Kings majesty protect and advance this blessed Truth of the Saving Gospel and encourage and invite all according to his power to imbrace it Is he not willing and desirous that the lawes be vigorously executed against papists and all perverters of this sound doctrine are any spoiled of their lawful civil libertyes What one thing hath he done without consent of the Peoples Representatives in Parliament at which any may except as a grievance what burden hath he laid upon their Estates but by law or by their owne consent in a necessary exigence Answ 1. If the protestant Religion continue without variation in the least vvhat meaneth then the bleating of the sheep and lowing of the oxen in every ones eares what meaneth the many Jesuites and Seminary Priests that goe up and downe the land what meaneth the many masses that are used in several parts of that land and in the very heart thereof in and about Edinbrough What church discipline is used against these belike the Prelates have no will to trouble their old brethren the native and faithful children of their catholick Mother the whore of Rome because they minde yet once againe to take a drink of the cup of her fornications and to returne as prodigal Children unto their former dear Mother the bloody harlote the mother of fornications And hovv cometh it that one Mr. Tyry formerly a knovvn papist is admitted to a prefessorshipe in St. Andrewes vvho not only cannot be reconciled to that minister who motioned the giving to him that Head to handle de anticbristo Romano but even in his theses did assert that the Pope was not Antichrist But what is become of the Religion of the Church of Scotland as it was reformed in doctorine worshipe discipline and government What is become of these Covenants vvhich were our strong bulvvarks against propery and vvhat is
for their defence and preservation Then much more may they lavvfully novv joyne and associate together for their defence and preservation without making any such rupture or new erections but endeavouring to keep the old Society firme and intire undissolved and unweakened So that though his glosse should be admitted he doth but bewray the ignorence of his capricious braine to take the Medium for the conclusion And the antecedent will be granted by politians and is expresly asserted by Althusius Polit Cap. 20. Num. 20. in case the Prince keep not his promise but violate his faith and Covenant 5. Suppose also that this which he alledgeth had been the authors positive assertion can he hence inferred with any colour of reason that it was or is the designe of the author and his party to dissipate and dissolve the old setled frame of this Kingdome and erect new Commonvvealthes vvith nevv distinct Soveraignes Seing every one knovveth that many things are lavvful vvhich are not expedient convenient nor necessary that it vvere the result of no mature deliberation but of madnesse and folly to intend and designe such a thing vvhich though lavvful in it self yet all things considered vvere very inexpendient and unnecessary yea not only not advantageous to their ends and purposes but quite destructive thereof Novv since the Surveyer hath dravvne in this controversy by the eares and set it in the front of his learned and elaborat pamphlet vve must suppose him one vvho is vvell versed in this topick and can give a good account of his politick notions touching this quaestion But alas if he had a real adversary to deal vvith as novv he doth but faigne one to himself it is easy fighting against a man of stravv or one of our ovvne making his ridiculous and yet audacious folly vvould easily be made to appear his adversary vvould laugh as indeed he vvould have cause at the shakeing of his spear He maketh this the thesis which he undertaketh to confirme That when politick bodyes are setled in voluntary associations or whatever way in the course of divine providence they have been reduced to live under the same lawes and authorities and have continued long in the union of a common interest under the protection of magistracy to break off from the body in seditious secessions cannot but be displeasing to God and they are no other then firebrands confounders of humane society fighters against God and his ordinance who instigate People to cut off themselves from the body of the Common wealth whereof they are members But would not his adversary tell him that he had granted as much in the words immediatly preceeding as would make him and his position both ridiculous For he hath granted That the Lord hath not by any precept particularly determined the bounds of every embodied Political society There being some greater and some lesser acting under their several heads and souveraigne Magistrates And seing neither God nor Nature hath determined the quantity and extent of each Republicki or embodyed Politick Society what more affinity hath it with sinful sedition to say that greater bodyes may be divided and subdivided into lesser Republicks then to say that moe lesser bodyes may associate together to make one greater especially seing Politicians tell us that the ends of government are more easily attained in a lesser Republick then in a greater and that a mid way commonwealth neither too largâ— nor too little is the best as being lesse subject to vices and greater calamities as was to be seen in the Roman Republick before it was enlarged in the dayes of Marius Sylla Pompey and Caesar and is to be seen this day in the Commonwealth of Venice and the like as Althusius shewes us Polit. Cap. 9. num 11. The time was when all the World was under one head and after they were multiplied they became distinct Republicks without any sinful or seditious secession The time was when all thess westerne parts were under one Emperour and was nothing but a seditious secession caused by firebrands the ground of their becoming many and distinct Republicks The time was when Scotland England and Irland were distinct Kingdomes and under distinct Soveraigne Magistrates and what repugnancy were it either to the Law of God or nature to say they might be so againe So were there once Seven Kings in England at once and moe then one King in Scotland at once and by no reason can he prove that it should always be as it is at present but by the same reason his adversaries could prove him guilty of treason for he behoved to say that because we were once all under one Emperour we ought to be so still and that the King must either hold his crowne of the Emperour or be an usurper and a seditious rebel for in the course of providence we were then reduced under the same Lawes and Authorities and continued in the union of a common interest for some good space of time Yea and observe many of these civil Lawes yet Thus we see whither this advocate will drive the matter and how little service he doth his Majesty for all his rich recompence But it may be his arguments are cogent and binding He hath many words Pag. 4 5. to prove that this is contrary to Religion The sum is this Never greater perversion of government then in the times of many of the Prophets and in the dayes of Christ and his holy Apostles and primitive Christians and yet this was never their doctrine or sense Answ Is this all that he can say to prove that this is contrary to Religion Sure his adversary will think that he hath little Religion who sayth so and that he hath farlesse loyalty to his Master the King of Great Britane for why Because contrare to the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles and the sense of all the primitive Christians he acknowledgeth the King of Britane to be a distinct King from the Roman Emperour and not to depend upon him They never taught that Britane and Irland should be ruled by a King distinct from him and that these Islands should be separate from the Roman Empire and so the King holds his Crowne by usurpation and by an irreligious secession from the Empire which neither Christ nor his Apostles ever taught and must not this man and not we acknovvledge Iudas of Galilee and Theudas to be his Masters For they taught especially the first as Iosephus and Ruffinus out of him shevv us that no tribute should be given to the Roman Emperour and he vvil do the same and say that it should be payed to king Charles the II. Next his adversary vvould tell him that if this were held and maintained as a poynt absolutely necessary to salvation then his argument vvould say something But seing it is only held as lavvful and according as providence determineth it to be convenient or inconvenient to be practicable it is sufficient if the doctrine of the
goe and reflect upon the magazine as he speaketh to Lex Rex who Quaest. 26. proveth by unanswerable arguments that the King is not above the Law but this Surveyer for all his big words dar not meddle with that debate but quarrelleth with a word Pag. 241. where that worthy Author is answering the objection of that Apostate Prelate Maxwel the Author of Sacrosancta Regum Majestas stollen from Arnisaeus which was this Why might not the People of Israël Peers or Sanhedrin have conveened before them judged or punished David for his Adultery and Murther Unto which he answered thus He taketh it for confessed that it had been treason in the Sanhedrin and States of Israël to have taken on them to judge and punish David for his Adultery and Murther but he giveth no reason for this nor any Word of God and truely though I will not presume to goe before others in this God's Law Gen. 9 ver 6. compared with Numb 35 ver 30 31. seemeth to say against them Nor can I think that God's Law or his Deputy the judges are to accept the persons of the great because they are great Deut. 1 ver 17. 2 Chron 19 ver 6 7. aud we say we cannot distinguish where the Law distinguisheth not The Lord speaketh to under judges Levit. 19 ver 15. Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor nor honour the person of the mighty or of the Prince for we know what these names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth I grant it is not God's meaning that the King should draw the sword against himself but yet it followeth not that if we speak of the demerite of blood that the Law of God accepteth any judge great or small And if the Estates be above the King as I conceive they are though it be a humane politick constitution that the King be free of all coaction of Law because it conduceth for the peace of the commonwealth yet if we make it a matter of conscience for my part I see no exception that God maketh if men make I crave leave to say à facto adjus non sequitur Thus that worthy Author and could he have uttered his judgment more spareingly and soberly in a matter that was not of great Moment to the question in hand so that though he had forborne to have spoken any thing to this at all his cause had not been in the least weakened and though we should grant that the Sanhedrin could not have judged David for these facts which yet we can cannot do what losse shall we have Seing we may easily grant and Lex Rex with us Pag. 243. that Tyranny only must unking a Prince and these acts were not acts of Tyranny and what shall this vaine Surveyer gaine then Why would he not examine other things which that worthy Author sayd more apposite to the cause Will not wise men laugh at this dealing and account him a fool in the first magnitude in handleing such a cause which so nearly concerneth his Majesties life after such a manner that a very school-boy may smile at Then he addeth So Pag. 348 and 428 and 238. and often elsewhere he that is Lex Rex will have the Estates executing the moral Law as he calls it on the King and punishing him and why because he sayes most thrasonically Pag. 460. I have unanswerably proved that the Kingdome is superior to the King and the People may be their owne judge in the tribunal of necessity Answ Lex Rex in two at least of these pages cited speaketh no such thing and if this Surveyer were not more windy and vaine then ever Thraso was he would not speak so of that Author till first he had discovered the answereablenesse of these arguments which neither he nor any of his complices shall ever be able to do But this Epicompothrasibombomachides will force a beliefe upon the world that with this very adverb thrasonical diffavit omnes in Castris Gurgustodianis and cry to his enchanted fraternity to sing Jo pan at his invention But what sayes he to all this 1 sayes he what should he meane to make it conduceable to the peace of the commâ—nwealth that the King be free of the coaction of Law and yet not so if it be made a matter of conscience is the preservation of the peace of the commonwealth no matter of conscience to him Or is not the constitution freeing the King from coaction of Law for that end warrantable Ans Doth not this ignoramus know that a question of this nature may be considered and answered politically and theologically And that many things may be tolerated or forborne in poynt of policy upon politick grounds and ends which if considered stricto Iure according to conscience should not be forborne nor tolerated David in point of policy did forbear to execute the Law upon the Murtherer Joab whom yet in poynt of conscience he accounted a man of death and therefore recommended the execution of the Law of God unto his Son Solomon and this toleration or forbearance may be lawfull or unlawful according to the weight of the matter tolerated or forborne and the nature and weight of the grounds in policy upon which this forbearance is determined So that though we should suppone it lawful for a Commonwealth to enact and determine in Law that their King should not be questioned for one single act of Murther or Adultery as other persones are Yet in poynt of conscience if the question be stated in thesi whether a King may be questioned for one single act of Murther and Adultery as another private person it may be answered affirmatively because the Law of God makes no exception of persones 2. It may be made a matter of conscience to make the King free of the coaction of Law in some small and inconsiderable particulars because of the probable hazard into which the Commonwealth may be brought by coërcing of him which all the value of the particular anent which the coaction is exerced will not countervaile But it will never be allowed in poynt of conscience to make him free of all coaction of Law so as he may without control murther millions destroy and waste Religion For that were not conduceable to the peace of the Common-wealth but a ready way to destroy all So that a constitution freeing the King from all coaction of Law how ever pretended for the preservation of the peace of the Common-wealth can never be warrandable For that were to make him actu primo and in actu signato a Tyger a Lyon a waster of the Commonvvealth if his good Nature should incline him to good peaceable things yet no thanks to the constitution Whereas he would make his reader beleeve that the Kings of the jewes were under no coërtion let him consider what Zuinglius sayeth explan art 42. Tom. 1. oper where he expresly sayeth That the Kings of the jewes and others
teaching should be so far transported as to take the circumstantials of Religion for the greater and weighty matters of Law and Gospel without which known and beleeved none can come to God Can we think or can any but this wretch who feareth not God think that the observing of sacred Covenants made about the life and substantials of Religion as well as more external things is no great and weighty matter of the Law No humble understanding seeker of God but though he knoweth there is a difference betwixt the circumstantialls of Religion and the weightier matters of Law and Gospel yet as He will not account every thing circumstantial which this circumstantially substantial Prelat vvil call so so He vvill have a tender regard to every thing vvhich Christ hath appoynted in his house But I pray vvho can take his Man for one of these meek people vvho hath the promise of God's teaching vvho to obtaine a bishoprick a circumstantial in his account but really to him and his collegues a substantiall sappy thing to sensual carnal Epicures and bellygods and to such as care for no other portion but one in this life hath sold and given away the most weighty matters of Law and Gospel both And how he shall then come to God unlesse he repent I see not It may be the needle headed casuist hath found out a new way and if not sure and saife yet to his experience easy and honourable viz. by ascending from a Presbyter to a Prelate But whither next Exitus acta probat either backward or headlong downe the precipice Againe Who can think sayes he that an intelligent people should account that the concernes of Christ's Kingdome and their owne salvation do lye with so much stresse upon this poynt that the weakest and most ignorant Minister shall have a potestative parity with the Man of greatest gifts learning and knowledge that the minister weakest in his prudentialls should have equal authority in the managing of the matters of God's house with the wisest and one of the most noted prudence that the youngest rawest and most unexperienced Minister should have as much power in ruleing the house of God as the Man fullest of years whose judgment is consolidated and ripened for government and who hath for a long time given such documents of good and wise behaviour that makes him fitter to rule the younger sort then to be ruled by them Answ No doubt but ye are the people and wisdome shall die with you yee are the Men of greatest gifts learning and knowledge viz. to devoure cups loose the knots of Govenants and to lead people the broad way to hell you are the wisest and most noted for prudence in that carnal wisdome which is enmity to God and in that worldly way of selling soul and conscience to purchase greetings in the high wayes high places honours revenues Court stations Court rewards and Court complements c. You are the Men fullest of years whose judgment is consolidated ripened for government giving for along time documents of good and wise behaviour having not only your judgments stupidly blinded but consciences seared and ripened for a dreadful plague and of this have you for a long time given sufficient documents by shewing how chamelion-like you can change all colours and how wittily you can turne with all tydes and have a behaviour suteable for all companyes but the company of God's people O ye Seraphical Divines or or rather Dunces O ye sufficiently qualified for a bacchus barrel O ye sublime Doctors of the blake art of perjury O ye learned Clerks in the mysteries of the Kingdome of Darknesse O ye whose prudence is to saile with all windes O ye Men of judgment consolidated into a stone having no conscience and far lesse piety Doubtlesse you are the Men the only Men fit for the sole possessing of that potestative power and authority to manage the matters of God's house and to rule the young stirplings But every tree is known by its frute and whether your singular Antichristian supereminency or the Apostolick parity hath best mannaged the matters of Christ's house the present overflowing and abounding of Idolatry Superstition Sodomy Adultery Uncleanesse Drunkenesse Atheisme Ignorance Profanity malignancy hatred of piety persecution of godlinesse and such like abhominations and the villannies of these debauched creatures the Curates will to all serious and soberâ— onlookers determine And by the present face of affaires together with all that which what is already come doth presage compared with what was seen while Presbyterian government was in any vigour and integrity will make all that feare the Lord see that more of the concerns of Christ's Kingdome and their owne salvation lyeth upon that very poynt of the discipline of Christ's house then by many hath been thought and will be a sufficient confirmation that this parity and not their domineering superiority was the only forme of government established by Christ and his Apostles Moreover he sayes Or who can see the prejudice to Christ's Kingdome and precious souls if such a worthy person as is described be intrusted with inspection over other Brethren and Churches in a reasonable bounds not with a dominative or lordly power but paternal and fatherly not to do after his owne arbitrement and as one unchallengeable in his actions but to be regulated by acts of the Church and Land and to be responsible to his Super tours in case of maleversation not to rule solely but with the consent and Counsel of Presbysers Answ By this Tyranny in the Church all may see what prejudice doth dayly come to Christ's Kingdome and to precious souls who will but open their eyes By what authority should any clame that power of inspection over others and that in a most unreasonable bounds Is the power of the present Lordly Lord Prelates paternal Sure they must be step Fathers then and that of the cruelest kinde Have not the present Lordly Prelats as much dominative and Lordly power as ever they had in Scotland And do they not rule and domineer in the Church after their owne arbitrement Who is to controle them unlesse the good King but a gentle curb in some or their jawes to make way for greater rage and Tyranny What acts of the Church are these which regulate them Be-like the lawes acts which their owne lusts make within their owne breasts for they are the Church the holy Clergy and who but they Who are over them as Superiours Sure none but the King in their account and to him must they be responsible and if they forget not the Court-art but laboure to keep some chief courtiers on their side they know all will be well and they will hear no rebukes but well done good and faithful Servant but no Church judicatory is over them But Zion's King is above them and their Superiour also and he will call them to an account for their usurpation and Tyranny He tells us they rule
seemeth to say that nothing is now left to christians but flight yet § 10. 11. he assenteth to Barclaius his concessions Let us next see what our Surveyer seemeth to yeeld Pag. 23. 24. Whatever may he said sayeth he of moral of legal felf defence against the souveraigne by way of petition or plea in court for saifty of a mans person or Estate and whatever may be said of warding off and defensively puting back personal injurious assaults to the manifest and immediat peril of life without any colour of deserving of reason of law or judicial proceeding or of a Womans violent resisting attempts against the honour of her chastity dearer to her then life and tending to insnare her also in sin againss God whereof her non-resistence makes her formally guilty and whatever may be done in the case of most habited notoure and compleat tyranny against all appearance of law manifesily tending to the destruction of the body of a people or greater part thereof by hostile furious actions or in the case of violent attempts or destruction of all knowne legal libertyes and the beeing of Reliagion according to law or in the case of vendition alienation of and giving a whole Kingdome to forraigners or strangers or some such like whatever I say in such horried cases which for most part cannot befal a prince in his natural and right wits a case wherein provision may be made that he hurt not himself nor his dominions may be done comes not at all within the compasse of our question although most disingenuously the discontented and seditious do strive on all occasions to aggravate matters so that the case concerning them may seem co-incident with these or the like that so they may justify their violence against the powers But howbeit this Surveyer think that these concessions make little for our advantage yet to understanding persons it will be cleare in general 1. That He and the rest of the Royal society of Court parasites and slatterers speak most inconsequentially unto themselves They cry up in their writtings an absolute and indispensible subjection unto the Supreame Magistrate due by all his subjects and yet when they are sore pinched they must clap their wings closer And drawe in their faire sailes grant that in such such cases not only his E missaries such as have his commission but Himself may be resisted not only by the Ephort Primores Regni but by very private subjects Did we not but just now heare our Surveyer crying out against Naphtaly for saying That what reasons could prove an absolute indispensible subjection will also prove an abosolute unlimited obedience as being unwelling to heare any thing spoken against an absolute vast subjection and yet behold here he is as willing as the rest to clip the wings of this inviolable soveraignity set forth unto us a limited retrenched subjection due to the Supreame Magistrate even by private persons 2. That by these concessions He and the rest cut the sinewes of their owne arguments and cause them to halt ere they assault us and teach us away of rejecting or answereing them For when they produce their arguments vvhether from reason or authorities they cannot but make them conclude universally and then they are necessitated themselves to ansvvere these universal arguments or otherwise retract their concessions and whatever vvay they think to evade vvith their concessions and supposed cases vve vvill finde roome enough to escape vvith our case as for exemple vvhen this Surveyer urgeth that subjection spokento Rom. 13. He must either grant that it must be restricted to such and such cases or else plead for an universal absolute unlimited and indispensible subjection and so retract his concessions and if he take the liberty to use his restrictions and so interpret the place as that it shall not reach his cases excepted he must grant us the same liberty to say that our case is not there meaned or condemned 3. By these concessions vve have this advantage that the distinction vvhich is made in this question of resistence betvvixt the Magistrate as such and the person or man vvho is the Magistrate is not so absurd and ridiculous as the Royalists give it out to be for here vve finde them forced to use the same so that if it be a defileing distinction they cannot be clean more then vve and vve see that resistence may be used against the person of or the man vvho is the Magistrate vvithout the least contempt or vvrong done unto the holy Ordinance of God othervvise they must of necessity say that in all the forementioned cases they very Ordinance of God is resisted and hovv then they shall reconcile that vvith Rom. 13. I see not 4. We see also That the Prerogative Royal vvhich they screvv up unto a transcendent absolutenesse and supremacy above lavv is but a meer chimaera vvhich themselves must abhominate as a loathsome brat 5. We see that salus populs est suprema lex the peoples saifty is such a royal thing that the King himself and all his prerogatives yea and municipal lawes too must vaile the cap unto it themselves being judges 6. We see also that they must grant a court of necessity in which private persones may judge the Supream Magistrat in order to their resisting of him for I hope they will grant that in these cases the people act with judgment and as rational men and if so they must say that the people must first judge and condemne the Supream Magistrate as erring and doing amisse before they can lawfully resist him 7. We have this advantage That the Arguments by which They can prove it lawful to resist the Magistrate in the cases granted by them will not be a little steadable to us in our case and for shame they will not condemne their owne arguments because in our mouthes 8. It will be easily granted by all that our case vvhich vve have truely stated vvill come nearer the cases vvhich adversaries do except then the case vvhich he hath sett dovvne and so Hovvever he think the cases mentioned by him do not come vvithin the compasse of the question vvhich he hath set dovvne yet understanding persones vvil see they are not altogether vvithout the compasse of that vvhich is the true question and true state of the controtroversy and that he hath no just cause to fay that vve hovvever he account us discontented and seditious do most disingenuosly strive on all occasions to aggravate matters so that the case concerning us may seem co-incident with these or the like But next more particularly These concessions are much for our advantage For 1. If it be lawful for a private person to defend his life or estate in a moral or legal vvay by petition or plea in court against the Souveraigne yea and by actual force if the Soveraigne or any in his name shal come to poind or take possession illegally as our lavves vvill
non-sense to affirme the same thing that is there asserted But sayes he Pag. 34. Subjection to the passion may fall under a command and this is called passive obedience which implyes more then meer passion or suffering even a disposition and motion of the heart to lye under that lot with an eye to God whose ordinance is used upon the sufferer only it is called passive obedience because as to the precise suffering the punishment there is no external action done enjoyned by the law or command of the Magistrate as there is in active obedience although there be some dispositive or preparatory actions in order to suffering not inferring a direct preparation to a mans owne suffering which he may and ought to do as going to a gallowes on his owne feet or up a ladder or laying down his head on a block that it may be strucken off Answ That subjection to the passion might fall under a command was granted in some cases by Lex Rex as was said but that it falleth under a command when God openeth a faire door to eshew it he is not able to prove 2. Hovv proper it is to call that submission passive obedience is not worth the while to enquire Lex Rex tolde us and he cannot confute it that it was repugnantia in adjecto to call it obedience since obedience properly so called is relative essentially to a law Now there is no moral law enjoyning this for no man is formally a sinner against a moral law because he suffereth not the evil of punishment nor are these in hell formally obedient to a law because they suffer against their will 3. As for that disposition and motion of heart which he speaketh of that is nothing but what Lex Rex said viz. That modus rei the manner of suffering was under a command and indeed obedience to that was and is obedience to a moral law But the Surveyer called it an errour to say that only the modus rei is commanded or forbidden and why because sayes he That same command that forbids resisting the Magistrate in doing his duty enjoyneth submission and passive obedience to him although we were able by force to deliver ourselves out of his hand Answ Then by him there is no medium betwixt this submission to passive obedience and positive resistence And so either he must say that flying is resisting which yet Pag. 41. he calleth a monster of a Stoical paradox or he must say that flying and refuseing to submit to this passive obedience is a submitting to this passive obedience And whether this will not rather look like a monster of a Stöical paradox let all men of common sense judge 2. Is the guilty person bound by any moral law to suffer death or whipping if the Magistrate will not execute the sentence upon him Or is every one in that case bound to deliver up himself to the Magistrate accuse himself and pursue the accusation until the sentence be executed If not how doth this passive submission fall under a moral law If he say when he is apprehended or in hands he is not to resist but submit to the stroke Answer 1. Will not any see that then the res ipsa is not commanded but the modus rei and so Lex Rex said true Pag. 318. That passive obedience to wicked Rulers was enjoyed Rom. 13. only in the manner and upon supposition that we must be subject to them and must suffer against our wills all the evil of punishment that they can inflict Then we must suffer patiently But 2. Though we be bound to submit to the Magistrate doing his duty and inflicting just punishment will it follow that therefore we are bound to submit to the Magistrate doing not his duty but inflicting unjust punishment Or doth the same passive obedience to powers punishing unjustly fall under the moral law How doth he prove either the consequence or the consequent We assert sayes he Pag. 53. That a private person though wrongfully afflicted by the lawful Magistrate proceeding according to law let it be so that it is lex malè posita or an evil law is hound not only to Christian patience in suffering but unto a submission without repelling of violence by violence and that in conscientious respect to the ordinance of God wherewith the lawful Magistrate is invested although abuseing it in this particular and with a tender regard to the prevention of seditions and confusions in humane societies Ans 1. This is dictator-like to prove the conclusion by asserting it what a ridiculous fool is he to come with his assertions and yet give us nothing but the very thing controverted Is not this a very hungry empty man to beg when he cannot better do the very thing in quaestion 2. Then it seemeth he will grant that a privat person may resist the lawful Magistrate when proceeding contrary to law where is then the conscientious respect to the Ordinance of God wherewith the lawful Magistrate is invested and that tender regaird to prevent sedition c. which he talketh of Sure in the one case the Ordinance is but abused as it is in the other 3. Let me ask if there were a just judge sitting who would execute justice and judgement for God and were summoning him to answere for his perjury apostasy and other villannies which he is conscious to himself of and some others are privie to and could witnesse against him would he compeare or rather would he not run from under the reach of justice and secure himself or if apprehended would he not labour an escape to save his neck from the rope If so as all who know him will veryly belveeve he would where would then this submission be which is due unto the Magistrate And where would his conscientious respect to the Ordinance of God not abused but very rightly used in that particular be 4. If a Magistrate abuseing his power to the destruction of the Subjects should be resisted what inconvenience would follow thereupon Seditions sayes he and confusions would be unavoydable if every one as he thinks himself wronged shall be allowed to use force upon the lawful Magistrate proceeding by law the greatest Malefactors being ready to justify themselves and to violate the justest Megistrates in their just proceedings Ausw This is but the old song chanted over and over againe to us and may therefore be dismissed with a word viz. That as the Magistrat's abuse of his power in a particular will not make the power it self unlawful as he will grant so nor will the abuse of this resistence in a particular make resistence it self unlawful 2. We plead not for resistence by every one who thinketh himself wronged but for resistence when the wrongs are manifest notour undenyable ◠grievous and intolerable and done to a whole land to God's glory to Christ's interest to a Covenant sworne and subscribed by all to the Fundamental lawes of the land to the compact betwixt King and
Subject to Religion Lawes Libertyes Lives and all which is dear to People These wrongs as they are no petty injuries so nor are they quaestionable or uncertane but as manifest as the sun at the nonetide of the day 3. What if the Magistrate or his Emissaryes proceed not according to law And what if the law which they pretend be no law de jure or a law made a non habente potestatem as shall be manifest to be our case should there no resistence then be used but a stupid submission out of a pretended and supposed regaird to the prevention of seditions and confusions 4. Since he thinks that so much regaird is to be had to the prevention of seditions and confusions in societies sure he should think that as much regaird is to be had unto the prevention of the utter ruine destruction of societies Now if magistrates abuseing their power to the destruction of Societyes might not be resisted hovv shall they be preserved from utter ruine vvhich is much more carefully to be prevented then seditions and confusions in societies And since he thinks vvithout ground that our doctrine is so evil and scandalous and openeth a vvide gap for all vvicked seditious persones to vvork confusion in the Commonvvealth and to overthrovv the best and justest Magistrates vve have just ground to think that his doctrine is not only evil and scandalous but most perverse vvicked and adhominable opening a vvide door to all tyranny oppression cruelty and an encouraging of all vvicked Tyrants to deal vvith their Subjects as so many Brutes or vvorse vvithout all fear of opposition and to destroy utterly all Commonvvealths or make them meer prison-houses for slaves c. And if this doctrine of his tend not more to libertinisme then ours let all judge His last ground out of scripture is that knovvn passage Rom. 13 ver 1 2. vvith 1 Per. 2 Ver. 11. I think it should have been ver 13. Concerning vvhich he sayes Such subjection is there commanded to the Powers then existing or in being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as were Caligulae Nero Domitian monstrou Tyrants enemies aud persecuters of God's People as is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand in order against them the word is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a military tearme every soul is commanded to be subject or to stand in order under them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for bidden to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand in military order against them either defensive or offensive By powers which are not to be resisted are clearly meant the persons in power as the Apostle afterward extones himself v. 3 4. calling them Rulers and Ministers of God he meanes undoubtedly certane supposita and her sons invested with power and cannot meane the abstract ordinance of God c. Answ 1. That subjection here required is a standing in order under them and is opposite to the resisting or contra-ordinatnesse here meaned is granted For 1. vve do not say that Christianity destroyeth Magistracy or exempteth Christians from subjection unto Magistracy and Magistrates As some Hereticks then did abuseing their Christian liberty to destroy Magistracy as Heathens objected unto Christians ' as Gerhard de Magist Polit. n. 34. thinketh vvhich as some think vvas the occasion of Paul's asserting the ordinance of Magistracy Nor 2. do vve say That it is unlavvful for Christians to be subjects unto Heathen Magistrates vvhich because Christian Gentiles might have drunk in from some jevves particularly the Gaulonites vvho held it unlavvful to yeeld any subjection unto Roman Emperours or to strangers might have been the occasion of Paul's discourse of this Ordinance And therefore to confute these mistakes The Apostle sayes Let every soul be subject unto higher powers c. that is acknowledge even such lavvful Magistrates though they be heathens and yee christians vvhether jevves or gentiles and think nor yourself exeemed from the duty of subjects tovvards such So that this makes nothing against us and the subjection here required upon this account is not the subjection novv in quaestion for a resisting of open and notour tyranny othervvise unavoidable doth vvell consist vvith this subjection viz. an acknovvledgment of Magistrats as lavvful powers ordained of God for the good of the Subjects 2. The vvord subjection being thus taken in a general comprehensive sense as containing in it all that duty which is required of Subjects tovvard their Superiours The opposite tearme resistence or counter-orderednesse must also be taken in a general comprehensive sense as including all the contrary evils Now as obedience is a special poynt of subjection unto Superiours So disobedience is a special poynt of contra ordinatnesse But as an universal and unlimited obedience in all poynts is not here required so neither can an universal and unlimited subjection to suffering be here required for as it can not be proved that every act of disobedience is a resistence here condemned that every act of obedience is a part of the subjection here required So nor can it be proved that every act of resisting or refuseing passive obedience is here condemned and that every act of submitting to passive obedience is here commanded But only that that obedience is commanded which is due to Magistrates and that resistence vvhich is unlawful is opposite unto that subjection required is prohibited So that this place cannot prove that all resistence is unlawful because non-obedience is resistence or a contraordinatnesse and yet all non-obedience is not here prohibited Againe the subjection comprehends that honour and respect which is due unto Superiours and which is both inward in the heart minde and thought and outwardly expressed in words gestures carriage c. So must the word resistence comprehend within it self all that is opposite there unto Now as by this place it cannot be evinced that it is unlawful to resist abused power or persons abuseing their power to tyranny and oppression in our thoughts and by our words for then it should be unlawful to abhore detest the oppression and tyranny of cruel tyrants or for the Messengers of the Lord to rebuke them for the same or for People to pray supplicat to God against them which is utterly absurd and false So nor can it be evinced by this place that it is unlavvful to resist such abuseing their povver by bodyly force for the text speaketh no more against this then against the other and yet the other is lavvful and therefore so may this be for any thing that is here said The one is resistence as vvel as the other though not so great but majus minus non variant speciem And therefore if this text to not condemne all resistence it cannot be evinced that it condemneth the resistence vvespeak of 3. Not withstanding of the Resistence that here seemeth to be prohibited yet we know that the Senate not only resisted Nero but proceeded against him by way of